Teachers Allowed to Carry...

[Madison]

Putting police officers that train regularly with firearms (including training in deadly force situations, not that anything can really train you for one) is a "safety measure". Arming teachers (half of whom can't even teach much less shoot) is lunacy.

DISCLAIMER: The above potshot at teachers is a generalization (one that unfortunately has merit) and in no way is intended as or should be perceived as a slight against a noble profession or those that practice it (of which I know there are a few among us). Just making a point.

Now put the damn gun down.

I think a few people are looking at this at an odd angle.

The school isn't arming anyone. All that is happening is that it has been approved for teachers to get the license and carry if they wish to. It's not like the school is handing out guns to all teachers as if they were lesson plans. The teachers will make the decision on it. And any that cannot pass the class to get the license won't have them, so it's not like any teacher that wants one will get one either.

Does anyone here not know if you could shoot someone who's holding a gun at you or your family? All of us know what we are capable or not capable of. Some of us would shoot without blinking an eye or shedding a tear, some of us couldn't pull the trigger even if it meant we'd die. And each of us knows where we stand on that matter. Don't you think teachers also have that same knowledge/ability? And using just a little brains (and we are talking about people who have earned a college degree), that person knows if they cannot fire a weapon and kill someone to protect themselves, that getting licensed and bringing a gun to school is pretty stupid. So it's a rather safe thing to say those particular teachers will not be getting the license.

Even if not one single teacher thinks they are or would be capable enough with a gun, just allowing that possibility deters violent crime in the school, because the students won't know who if any of the teachers might have the ability to shoot them. As I said before, even stupid/crazy kids with guns don't truely want to die. Schools are a very easy target because the shooter knows everyone is unarmed. Time to finally take away that security blanket.

[Kilroy]

Putting police officers that train regularly with firearms (including training in deadly force situations, not that anything can really train you for one) is a "safety measure". Arming teachers (half of whom can't even teach much less shoot) is lunacy.

DISCLAIMER: The above potshot at teachers is a generalization (one that unfortunately has merit) and in no way is intended as or should be perceived as a slight against a noble profession or those that practice it (of which I know there are a few among us). Just making a point.

Now put the damn gun down.

I think a few people are looking at this at an odd angle.

The school isn't arming anyone. All that is happening is that it has been approved for teachers to get the license and carry if they wish to. It's not like the school is handing out guns to all teachers as if they were lesson plans. The teachers will make the decision on it. And any that cannot pass the class to get the license won't have them, so it's not like any teacher that wants one will get one either.

Does anyone here not know if you could shoot someone who's holding a gun at you or your family? All of us know what we are capable or not capable of. Some of us would shoot without blinking an eye or shedding a tear, some of us couldn't pull the trigger even if it meant we'd die. And each of us knows where we stand on that matter. Don't you think teachers also have that same knowledge/ability? And using just a little brains (and we are talking about people who have earned a college degree), that person knows if they cannot fire a weapon and kill someone to protect themselves, that getting licensed and bringing a gun to school is pretty stupid. So it's a rather safe thing to say those particular teachers will not be getting the license.

Even if not one single teacher thinks they are or would be capable enough with a gun, just allowing that possibility deters violent crime in the school, because the students won't know who if any of the teachers might have the ability to shoot them. As I said before, even stupid/crazy kids with guns don't truely want to die. Schools are a very easy target because the shooter knows everyone is unarmed. Time to finally take away that security blanket.

My angle's fine. I just think that even offering the opportunity to pack at school to teachers is borderine asinine, and this is from a pro-gun guy.

What happens when the science teacher comes to work after a fight with the wife, overreacts to situation X, and shoots the lunch lady?

Also, the notion that arming everyone (or the threat of them being armed) will somehow deter violent crimes (anywhere) is fallacy. Numbers have never backed that up, and I'd lay money they wouldn't no matter how many guns you hand out AT SCHOOL.

[bigh0rt]

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1538661720080815

I like it.

Please bring this to New York State...

It's not like the school is handing out guns to all teachers as if they were lesson plans.

They don't even hand those out to us. Quite the contrary.

[knapplc]

I think a few people are looking at this at an odd angle.

Totally agree.

The school isn't arming anyone. All that is happening is that it has been approved for teachers to get the license and carry if they wish to. It's not like the school is handing out guns to all teachers as if they were lesson plans. The teachers will make the decision on it. And any that cannot pass the class to get the license won't have them, so it's not like any teacher that wants one will get one either.

Anyone who can't pass the driving test doesn't get a license to drive, either. So only good, licensed people drive. That's why the roads in America are the safest places in the world. Nobody ever gets hurt, nobody ever exercises poor judgment, nobody ever misjudges their own capabilities while behind the wheel. Because they're all licensed drivers who passed the test.

Does anyone here not know if you could shoot someone who's holding a gun at you or your family? All of us know what we are capable or not capable of. Some of us would shoot without blinking an eye or shedding a tear, some of us couldn't pull the trigger even if it meant we'd die. And each of us knows where we stand on that matter. Don't you think teachers also have that same knowledge/ability? And using just a little brains (and we are talking about people who have earned a college degree), that person knows if they cannot fire a weapon and kill someone to protect themselves, that getting licensed and bringing a gun to school is pretty stupid. So it's a rather safe thing to say those particular teachers will not be getting the license.

I work with educators all the time, from Pre-K through university professors. A fair portion of them exercise fairly awful judgment on a fairly regular basis. Having their teaching degree, their masters in education - heck, even their doctorate and tenure - doesn't mean they are good judges of even their own actions. I see abuse, manipulation, fraud, extortion and any number of other behaviors exhibited from educators all the time.

The fact that they're teachers doesn't make them more or less than anyone else - they just have a different area of expertise than the next guy. They have the same good and bad days as anyone else, and they are not - repeat, not - marksmen. In a situation where there's a shooter in a room full of students, putting a gun in the teacher's hand only means that those students have twice the chance of getting shot, either on purpose by the shooter or on accident by the teacher missing their shot. I'd love to live in the world you live in Mad, where we always hit what we aim at, but I don't. Even I miss the bunnies sometimes.

Even if not one single teacher thinks they are or would be capable enough with a gun, just allowing that possibility deters violent crime in the school, because the students won't know who if any of the teachers might have the ability to shoot them. As I said before, even stupid/crazy kids with guns don't truely want to die. Schools are a very easy target because the shooter knows everyone is unarmed. Time to finally take away that security blanket.

You simply do not grasp the mindset of people who go on shooting rampages if you believe the above paragraph. Study up on sociopathic behavior and you'll see that this cowardly self-preservation tack you're taking doesn't apply to these people.

[steelerfan513]

Putting police officers that train regularly with firearms (including training in deadly force situations, not that anything can really train you for one) is a "safety measure". Arming teachers (half of whom can't even teach much less shoot) is lunacy.

DISCLAIMER: The above potshot at teachers is a generalization (one that unfortunately has merit) and in no way is intended as or should be perceived as a slight against a noble profession or those that practice it (of which I know there are a few among us). Just making a point.

You're unfortunately right in your teacher generalization Kilroy. My public high school is one of the best in the country, and there are quite a few teachers, some whom have been there quite a long time, that aren't qualified to be teachers.

Don't really have much to add because as usual you guys have covered just about everything, but chalk me up as one against this proposal. If this were implemented at my high school, I definitely wouldn't feel safer; quite the opposite.

[Madison]

There really isn't a *perfect* solution to fixing the security issues in school. No matter what route the schools take, there will be drawbacks, but that doesn't mean the solution is to sit around and twiddle our thumbs hoping for the impossible *perfect* solution to come along.

Teachers are no different than the average person who can go get licensed and carry a gun, so they are no bigger threat or worry than anyone else you see in your daily life. Would/could an accident happen? Of course. The question is does the benefit to the greater good outweigh the negatives? Absolutely and without question in my eyes.

Times change folks, and we have to change with them. And they change pretty rapidly.

Just look at your grandparents (or just your parents depending on your age). In their day, there were no such things as car alarms, home security systems, 911, panic buttons to call for help, etc. People could walk anywhere without fear of being mugged, robbed, raped, etc. But times change, the world is getting worse and worse with each passing day, and security is a necessity now. I couldn't imagine owning a car or home without having a security system on it nowadays. I couldn't imagine going to the zoo, a ball game, Six Flags, or anything like that and allowing my boy to go do his own thing and meet me somewhere at a predetermined time (anyone here remember going to an amusement park as a kid, being allowed to go on your own and meet say at the ferris wheel at noon for lunch? I remember when it was safe enough to do that.). Just can't be done anymore without taking a huge risk. That's only 1 or 2 generations, depending on your age. Doesn't get much quicker than that, and the current decision makers need to get off their lazy duffs (since the country has also grown quite lazy in that same time span) and do something. *Perfect* is impossible, so start making changes that benefit the greater good and improve said changes as we go along.

So while some would prefer to sit on their hands and hope bad things don't happen, I don't subscribe to the theory that "it will never happen to me". Is allowing teachers that want to and can pass the class to get a carry permit the *perfect* solution? Nope. But it is better than sitting around and letting the criminals continue to kill our kids while we hope for the mythical *perfect* solution to swoop down and take away all our fears.

[houstonherdfan]

WEll, it seems as opinions on this are all over the place. Here's the thing, this rule has been instituted in a Texas rural town. I would almost be willing to bet a month's of my salary That you could not come to any Texas rural small town and find more than a few people (from age 12 and up) would don't have at least a rudimentry (sp) understanding of how to properly handle and use a firearm.

I personally would want to know exactly how the rule was top be instituted if it were to happen in my son's school. Based on how the rule was to be put in place would determine whether I was for or against it.

This would not work in many places because they are many places in this country were the knowledge of firearms of the general population is much less than it is here in TX. Those places probably would have more issues.

AS far as the possession of firearms not reducing violent crime, I have one thing to say about that. I would bet you money that crime in Joe Horn's neighborhood of Pasadena TX will be non existant for a while. You are probably right about it not generally reducing violent crime, the criminals will just move to a different place where they are less likely to get shot.

[danleroi22]

In a state like Texas this law is completely understandable. While I disagree with the law in general, I can see the reasoning for it, although flawed. In this rural Texas town people are bound to own firearms anyway. Each kid in the school probably has some sort of access to a weapon, or if not, then knows someone who does. With this generalization in place, it's probably safe to say that any kid in the town could bring a weapon into school. I even doubt that teachers don't already bring weapons into school, this is just making it officially okay.

Plus, if they're implementing this law, it probably implies there has been some sort of problem in the first place. It's not like they would give guns to teachers without reason, apparently there has been some sort of stir to get this law in motion and in place... so I'll bet there's a warrant behind it. Still don't agree with the law, because I'm a liberal gun control advocate, but I can understand there must be some reason I don't know.

So before jumping to conclusions, this may actually help save lives. Don't know how, but it could... being optimistic.

From another angle, I highly doubt that any kid is going to try and steal his teacher's gun away from them. If a kid is bent on killing some people in his class, like I said above, he probably has access to a gun somewhere else... so he won't have to bother with the teacher's gun. If anhything, his teacher's gun would be a deterant to him attacking his fellow students.

In any case, there WILL be weapons in school, no matter what laws are passed... so the argument is almost irrelavant. Make it illegal or legal, and people will do it either way. My biggest fear with this law is that it snowballs and becomes national or at least more widespread than a single Texas county.

[Dan Lambskin]

i'm surprised no one has suggested bringing Michelle Pfifer in

[Metroid]

i'm surprised no one has suggested bringing Michelle Pfifer in

Forget Michelle Phifer bring in Morgan Freeman.