Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Teachers get preliminary OK to carry weapons

Gun Control Teachers OK permit to carry

  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#61 Gaiate

Gaiate

    Spirit Blade

  • Islander
  • 1,003 posts

Posted 02 July 2003 - 09:42 AM

Quote

But the hypothetic teacher trying to break the fight up would be seen as an escalation. The law applies differently to people who carry concealed weapons. They're not allowed to escalate the situation. The idea is to defuse it. Best to let someone else get between them.

Okay, suppose the teacher draws the gun to stop the fight.  For the sake of argument, letís also say that one of the students has a little martial arts training.  Not much, but a little.  If the teacher is within a certain distance, it becomes very easy to disarm them.  Now the pissed off kid has the gun, when before all he had was his fists.

Quote

Why is the 60-year old professor putting himself into that situation when he isn't physically able to deal with it? This whole scenario is a stretch anyway, relying on quite a few "ifs". Any situation has that potential.

When an adult sees two kids fighting, the first thing they do, in my experience, is to put themselves in between them, regardless of whether or not they can physically overpower either one.  The idea is that the kids arenít looking to hit the adult, so theyíll hold back.  Then, the emotions are given a moment or two to cool down, and the adult can send the kids their separate ways.

And IMO, there arenít that many ďifsĒ in this scenario.  Two kids fighting, one teacher with a gun who isnít as physically powerful.  The reason the teacher has the gun in the first place might be the fact that these kids could pummel him/her if they wanted to.

Quote

What if a student decides to brain a teacher with a nearby chair? Does that mean that the chairs shouldn't be there? What if a teacher "snaps" and slams a student's head into a table or stabs him in the eye with a pen? Does that mean we should ban tables and pens in schools?

The difference is that guns are designed and built to kill people.  Itís a lot harder to kill someone with a chair or a desk or a pen.  A simple squeeze, and someoneís burying a son or a daughter or a father or a mother.  Hell, a twitch could do it in some cases.  Twitch with a pen in your hand, and you might scratch someone.

Quote

I think we have a fundamental disconnect on our ideas of firearms. To me, firearms are tools, nothing more. I don't ascribe evil intent to them, nor do I blame them for society's ills.

Indeed we do.  Guns arenít tools.  Theyíre weapons.  Thereís a big difference there.  No, gunís donít have evil intent in an of themselves, but the fact that they make it so easy to take a life means that there has to be some way to keep them under control.

Quote

We're not necessarily talking about a week of training here... Frankly, I think you'd be surprised at how seriously most CCW holders take their responsibilities. From what I've seen in my personal experience, there are quite a number (I'd even venture the majority) of CCW holders practice more with their firearms than most law enforcement officers. Again, these are people who have made a conscious decision to take their self-defense into their own hands. They have made an enormous decision in terms of their way of life, and they train so accordingly. Now, will there be abberations? Sure. There always are. There are those that made the remark that there are some teachers they wouldn't trust with a pair of scissors. I can say the same thing about some law enforcement officers.

And I sincerely and whole heartedly believe that as soon as that responsible marksman is looking at another gun pointed at his head, heís going to forget a lot of what he trained for.  Practicing at a shooting range is not the same thing as counter assault training.  You donít have people shooting back at you.  You donít have innocent people running all over the place.  You donít have that kind of fight-or-flight response that screws with logical thought.

Quote

No, I'm not saying it wouldn't have happened. I'm saying that there was a potential to stop the situation before it got worse.

Yes, I agree.  But I think there was at least as much of a chance for those teachers to make things worse.

Quote

So you'd rather have any number of innocent casualties caused by the psycho student than one innocent casualty caused by a teacher defending his class? We're still delving too far into "what if" territory. "Nearly as many" doesn't work here. You keep saying that the "lack of training" will cause just as many casualties, but isn't it possible that the teacher's mere presence and actions will stop a situation before it gets worse?

No, I donít think it would.  Like I said earlier, if a kid decides heís going to shoot up his school, having teachers with guns isnít going to stop him.  At that point, heís likely beyond rational thought on the topic.  It probably wouldnít stop him even if there was a SWAT team ready and waiting for him.

The presence of armed teachers would create an aura of fear at least as strong as any aura of safety.  And unless they get extensive psychological profiles on everyone who wants to carry a concealed weapon, you are going to get people who really should not have them carrying them.  A background check doesnít cover everything.  Sometimes, the person just hasnít had the chance to cause a tragedy yet.  This law would make it that much easier.

Quote

Armed security is a good start. Local schools here have school police who are Class-I Peace Officers. However, more often than not, they're not on any one campus, but roving around between. See my point about things happening too quickly for police to respond. In order for armed security to do any good, they must maintain a strong enough presence on campus.

Then they should hire more Peace Officers to maintain that presence.

Quote

Agreed 100%. The safety of students is at the very heart of this debate. We just have different theories as to how we should go about it.

Well, thatís one thing we agree on anyway. ;)

Quote

Source please? Private transactions of firearms are covered under existing federal and state laws. And for the record, AK-47s and M-16s in the military form are illegal under the National Firearms Act of 1934 as automatic weapons. They can be purchased, but not without an extensive background check and a federal license. State laws can outlaw them entirely. In fact, in California (and other states), firearms that *look* like AK-47s and M-16s are illegal.

I currently live in Cincinnati.  Less than two weeks ago, I saw an ad in the Cincinnati Enquirer about a gun show a state or two over (I believe it was Oklahoma, but Iím not sure).  In this ad, they were advertising tables that had automatic weapons of all kinds.  

Thereís a reason why itís called the ďgun show loophole.Ē  People can easily acquire just about anything they want if they know where to look.  IIRC, it was a gun show where Harris and Klebold got their weapons.  For some reason, there is a loophole in the law that allows these shows to sell these weapons.

Quote

What's your standard of qualification? The state in question has set its standards, and the people of that state are happy with it.

I highly doubt everyone in that state is happy with the laws.  Laws come up for debate and re-debate all the time.

Quote

Again, I'd rather take my chances of a teacher shooting me accidentally while aiming at a psycho than having that psycho kill me intentionally. Fatalistic? Maybe. But if even *one* life was saved, it would be worth it, then, IMHO.

Well, thatís fine for you, but what about the other students who would be in that situation?  Would they all want to have fire coming from two sides?

Quote

You've got a point about things not turning out exactly as they're intended. Does that mean we should stop trying?

When the potential for harm outweighs the potential for good, then yes.  Not that we stop trying to fix the situation, but we try to find other solutions that work better.

Quote

I do think we need to remember that this is one school district in one county in one state that is considering this. If that school board thinks it's a good thing for them, who are we to judge? We're all in different situations than those people, and after all, they are the best ones to judge their situation, and thus are the best ones to react accordingly.

The problem is one law in one state begins to set a precedent.  Thatís how most things start.  If this eventually became federal law, I would be terrified.

--Te
"This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-ŗ-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V." -- V, making an first impression

"Dude . . . that was cool." -- My first impression of V

#62 Gaiate

Gaiate

    Spirit Blade

  • Islander
  • 1,003 posts

Posted 02 July 2003 - 09:58 AM

Quote

And said student is going to frisk the teacher while in the fight in an attempt to find a weapon that is concealed on that teacher?  Sure a concealed pistol wonít make it through a through frisking and search but a casual brushing or scuffle in a fight isnít really going to cut it for finding the weapon. 

I didn't say the kid would automatically find the gun, but it only takes that one chance for them to feel it.  Besides, a holster 90% of the time is going to be on a belt at the teacher's hip.  That significantly narrows the "search area."

Quote

If you happen to put your hand right on it perhaps but other than that most concealed weapons are going to be fairly had to detect especially in the heat of a fight.  In addition the weapon will be under at least one layer of clothes so they have to get their hands under that and then work the holster by feel. 

Or, they could grab and yank as hard as they could.  Either the holster of the belt could break, especially in the situation I offered above with an athlete.

Quote

Then they have to figure out how to operate the weapons and safety system. 

True, but it's not that hard to figure it out.  If you only have a second or two, if you're just waving it around, the mere fact that you have the gun in your hand is going to cause people to hesitate, giving you a couple more seconds.  Even if the teacher knew the gun was safetied, s/he would instinctively step back when the gun is first pointed at them, giving the kid a chance to figure it out.

In addition to that, a lot of kids know their way around a gun, even ones who normally wouldn't go around shooting people.  Then, it's only a simple flick.


Quote

Most schools that I know of have procedures in place to keep teachers and other school officials from attempting to physically intervene in a fight where if attacked they would be incapable of basic defense of themselves. 

And most I've met don't follow them.  More than once I've seen a fight broken up by a teacher or staff member physically putting himself in the way of the fight.

Quote

Iíve worked at places that had glorified rent a cop Security Guards that are armed and they arenít as good as some people claim they are.  As Shal noted for many of these jobs they have minimal training in firearms or procedures for using them and are often worse off than a CCP.

Agreed.  That's why I like the idea of off-duty or former cops.

Quote

Secondarily assume you do place Security Guards at the front of the school with metal detectors.  They are now in a fixed location that is well known and probably are going to be the first victims of someone who is attempting to shoot their way in the door.  A random CCP(s) in the school results in the situation being one where any teacher or other person working there might have a weapon and an attacker has no idea who might be the one attempting to put a bullet in them.

Well, you really only need one guy to stand there with the metal detector.  Another could be patrolling the halls.

--Te
"This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-ŗ-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V." -- V, making an first impression

"Dude . . . that was cool." -- My first impression of V

#63 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 02 July 2003 - 09:59 AM

Quote

Giate: Okay, suppose the teacher draws the gun to stop the fight.

On what grounds are they drawing the weapon? I donít see an imminent threat to life in a simple fight unless someone is beating someone to death.  One of the basic things that most anyone who is trained with a weapon is taught is to not draw it unless you are in a situation that may call for the imminent use of that weapon in defense of life.  In other words you donít draw a gun and threaten people with it to break up a fistfight.      

Quote

Giate: For the sake of argument, letís also say that one of the students has a little martial arts training. Not much, but a little.

Iím surte this happens everyday!  You are getting back into the arena of constructing highly unlikely scenarios that departs from what is more often the reality of the situation.  

Quote

Giate: If the teacher is within a certain distance, it becomes very easy to disarm them. Now the pissed off kid has the gun, when before all he had was his fists.

A) The gun wouldnít be drawn in the first place.
B) When armed with a weapon you donít stand at a distance where you can be easily disarmed by a unarmed person.  

Quote

Giate: A simple squeeze, and someoneís burying a son or a daughter or a father or a mother.

Conversely a simple squeeze and you have 30 families that donít have to go through the pain of burying their sons and daughters.  

Quote

Giate: And I sincerely and whole heartedly believe that as soon as that responsible marksman is looking at another gun pointed at his head, heís going to forget a lot of what he trained for.

And under trained and underpaid Security Guards are better how?
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#64 Gaiate

Gaiate

    Spirit Blade

  • Islander
  • 1,003 posts

Posted 02 July 2003 - 10:05 AM

Quote

On what grounds are they drawing the weapon? I donít see an imminent threat to life in a simple fight unless someone is beating someone to death.  One of the basic things that most anyone who is trained with a weapon is taught is to not draw it unless you are in a situation that may call for the imminent use of that weapon in defense of life.  In other words you donít draw a gun and threaten people with it to break up a fistfight.

I didn't start that scenario.  Jon did, unless I misunderstood him.

Quote

Iím surte this happens everyday!  You are getting back into the arena of constructing highly unlikely scenarios that departs from what is more often the reality of the situation.

You'd be surprised how many teenagers have some form of martial arts or self defense training.  In high school, I knew several kids who loved to brag about their fighting prowess cause they took karate.  I never thought they were the black belts they claimed to be, but I could see that they did have some training.  Those are the kinds of hotheads I was talking about.

Quote

A) The gun wouldnít be drawn in the first place.

Answered above.

Quote

B) When armed with a weapon you donít stand at a distance where you can be easily disarmed by a unarmed person. 

When you're doing it right, sure.  But it isn't going to happen that way the whole time.

Quote

Conversely a simple squeeze and you have 30 families that donít have to go through the pain of burying their sons and daughters. 

Granted, but school shootings are more rare then people think.  Fist fights go on everyday.

Quote

And under trained and underpaid Security Guards are better how?

Again, answered above.

--Te
"This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-ŗ-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V." -- V, making an first impression

"Dude . . . that was cool." -- My first impression of V

#65 jon3831

jon3831

    Iolanthe's evil conservative twin

  • Islander
  • 2,601 posts

Posted 02 July 2003 - 10:13 AM

Gaiate, on Jul 1 2003, 04:06 PM, said:

I didn't start that scenario.  Jon did, unless I misunderstood him.
Unless I misunderstood LotS, that came from him. I believe the exact phrasing was "grab the gun fromthe teacher." That implied (in my mind) a drawn firearm. If you'll recall, sir, I *never* advocated a teacher drawing a firearm to disrupt a fistfight.

In fact, to save you the trouble of rereading the thread, I'll c/p what I said relevant to the subject:

Quote

1) If it was just a fistfight, the teacher should not have drawn the weapon. Use of lethal force is only allowed when there is an immediate danger to life. The weapon should have been holstered.

"The issue is not war and peace, rather, how best to   preserve our freedom."
                    --General Russell E. Dougherty, USAF

WWCELeMD?

#66 Gaiate

Gaiate

    Spirit Blade

  • Islander
  • 1,003 posts

Posted 02 July 2003 - 10:15 AM

My apologies, Jon.  I didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

--Te
"This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-ŗ-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V." -- V, making an first impression

"Dude . . . that was cool." -- My first impression of V

#67 jon3831

jon3831

    Iolanthe's evil conservative twin

  • Islander
  • 2,601 posts

Posted 02 July 2003 - 10:33 AM

^No worries, Te. :)
"The issue is not war and peace, rather, how best to   preserve our freedom."
                    --General Russell E. Dougherty, USAF

WWCELeMD?

#68 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,309 posts

Posted 11 July 2003 - 06:01 AM

I'm late to this topic, but I'm here because of another one.

While I appreciate the viewpoint of those who say that schools need to be defended... I cannot agree that teachers are the ones who should be doing that.

Teachers job is teaching.  Period.  If school safety is a concern, secure the school.  Screen students for weapons. Establish viewable perimeters so that no suspicious people can simply walk up on the campus (don't most schools already have this?) Put up security cameras and hire security guards.  Along with fire drills have safety drills, in which the emergency management system is activated, police are contacted, etc.

In short - this is a shortsighted, lazy plan that really serves no purpose - but potentially endangers the lives of children who are not allowed to be armed.  One argument the gun lobby makes is that citizens ought to be allowed to carry guns so that criminals aren't the only ones with them.

Now apply this logic to students in an armed-teacher situation.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#69 the 'Hawk

the 'Hawk
  • Islander
  • 5,281 posts

Posted 11 July 2003 - 07:04 AM

I've watched this thread develop with keen interest, both as a future school teacher and as an individual conversant, if not fluent, in the importance of the treatment and handling of firearms.

And frankly, I'm still not convinced that it's a good idea.

Let me first go back and review the reasons why it's a bad idea.

Firstly, the 'deterrent' argument --that armed teachers carrying concealed handguns will somehow increase the likelihood of students packing heat-- assumes that a school with armed teachers wouldn't go about taking other security measures as well, such as metal detectors and other such means of checking students for weapons at the door. Any school that arms its teachers and takes no further precautions deserves a tragic end for being so shortsighted.

Secondly, the 'safety' arguments --that teachers could lose control of their weapons, that students could take a teacher's gun, etc-- avoids the question. Not every teacher would be armed, obviously. Some teachers could be uncomfortable with the idea. I know I would be uncomfortable carrying a loaded handgun every day to class. I'm uncomfortable enough with chalk. That stuff scares me. But anyway-- the point is, not every teacher would be certified, qualified and willing to carry a handgun. More than that, I would certainly presume that within that 'certification' would be at least one or two psych assessments to be sure that such teachers would only use their special dispensation for good reason, and so on.

At the same time, though, I have to reject the 'killing zone' argument, for the simple reason that, while I fully recognize and understand that a school is little more than a meat grinder for an armed and pissed off student, armed teachers aren't deterrents, they're bigger targets. If I'm a disgruntled youth, the first thing I'm going to do, knowing a teacher is armed, is go after every teacher I see. Like in a first-person shooter video game-- you know the bossmonster is going to shoot you back, so you kill it first, then take out the other fodder. So if anything, these teachers would be better off given dispensation for Kevlar.

And when you consider that most teachers would tend to shy away from carrying a handgun for far less rational reasons than the ones we've outlined here (ranging from the "I'm not a cop, I shouldn't have to" rationale to the more sublime "ooh, guns are evil" reasoning), all this does is concede defeat on the issue of school safety and security, and put the onus on the student to try harder if they want to bring harm to the school (by using bombs or high-rate-of-fire weapons instead of handguns, in order to keep the attacker's advantage).

Not to mention that the statistical probability of getting shot at school is still less likely than being run over in the parking lot, according to everything I've read. (This may change in the future, however. And while I believe in planning ahead, that planning should stick to the classroom, not the firing range.)

Anyway. Just my bit. I'm not really contributing anything new, just.... just sayin'.

:cool:
ďNow is the hour, Riders of Rohan, oaths you have taken! Now, fulfil them all! To lord and land!Ē  
~ Eomer, LotR:RotK

#70 MrsRhade

MrsRhade

    All you need is love

  • Islander
  • 1,337 posts

Posted 11 July 2003 - 07:20 AM

QueenTiye, on Jul 10 2003, 02:57 PM, said:

Teachers job is teaching.  Period.  If school safety is a concern, secure the school.  Screen students for weapons. Establish viewable perimeters so that no suspicious people can simply walk up on the campus (don't most schools already have this?) Put up security cameras and hire security guards.  Along with fire drills have safety drills, in which the emergency management system is activated, police are contacted, etc.
I'm late to this discussion as well.

QT, you took the words right out of my mouth. I so agree with you.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Gun Control, Teachers, OK permit to carry

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users