Will it ever end? Shootings

[Fluteman]

I wouldn't mind seeing a small arsenal set up in a gun safe in a manned location (say the office), and only have select personnel that are trained for these type of situations with access to it. I don't know that giving teachers the right to conceal is necessarily the right idea IMO.

 

[brock ratcliff]

The more I think about it the more I'm against the idea of teachers in schools with guns.... I think some of them could handle the situation but IMO most couldn't.... You're talking about teachers basically being asked too do what armed police officers sometimes have a hard time doing and they have far more training than what they could possibly put these teachers through....

There has too be some out of the box thinking too be done.... What's the answer I really don't know, but could one of them be too relocate some national gaurd troops? Too much? At this point I really don't know, some would think that's too heavy handed and a mission outside of their scope. But something has too change and the shrinking budgets and the probability of passing levies/taxes too pay for upgrades too beef up security in the older school buildings I just don't see happening.....

I'm a Military guy who thinks in Military answers, sometimes I think it's too easy where others think I want a Military state..... Not really just using the assets at our disposal...... Like I said, just stuff bouncing around in my head.....

Nobody said every teacher was cut out for the "security job". Just a few...
You're a military man, you know people can learn skills. Let me tell you about Johnny McCumber. He was a kid from Bruce WI. Lived on a dairy farm his whole life until he was drawn into WWII. He went into the 101st airbourne, jumped into Normandy, fought through the battle of the bulge, and relaxed at the Eagle's Nest at war's end. You've seen the movie... He went to my church. I grew up respecting that guy. I saw him beat the pony tail off a biker-type on a bright Sunday morning after he had said a rude comment or two to a pretty young lady after she walked out of the church. He was well in his 70's by then, and the biker dude was a solid foot taller, and 30+ yrs younger! Mr. McCumber had never been off his farm until he entered the army, yet he learned the skills to fight the world's "best army"... and win.
This wouldn't be asking teacher's to put themselves in a situation. It would be giving them a chance to fight their way out of a situation, and saving some of their kids in the process.

 

[brock ratcliff]

I wouldn't mind seeing a small arsenal set up in a gun safe in a manned location (say the office), and only have select personnel that are trained for these type of situations with access to it. I don't know that giving teachers the right to conceal is necessarily the right idea IMO.

How do they get past an armed nut job to get to the arsenal?

 

[cotty16]

I wouldn't mind seeing a small arsenal set up in a gun safe in a manned location (say the office), and only have select personnel that are trained for these type of situations with access to it. I don't know that giving teachers the right to conceal is necessarily the right idea IMO.

Why not a qualified few in each building?

 

["J"]

The thing that keeps eating at me is that you're going too ask these teachers too act as police officers and put them in situations where they may or may not function too the level needed.... Then if the shit hits the fan, the teacher acts on it and God forbid misses and kills a kid..... Now what??? Yeah it can happen with a police officer/Military member and does happen but that's their job and there's ck's and balances too deal with that..... On the teachers end??? Not so much..... I'm not knocking any of you who would stand up and offer too carry too protect the children, but I got to say you're a little naive in your thinking.....

If you don't believe me take some tactical classes where you go above and beyond the CCW class where you get put into situations where you're not shooting straight on @ a target, shooting from behind objects with non-targets in the line of fire in low light conditions and so forth.... Not so cut and dry at that point.... Like I said, not knocking anyone but there's more too it than just taking a class and strapping it on especially when kids are involved....

 

[cotty16]

The thing that keeps eating at me is that you're going too ask these teachers too act as police officers and put them in situations where they may or may not function too the level needed.... Then if the shit hits the fan, the teacher acts on it and God forbid misses and kills a kid..... Now what??? Yeah it can happen with a police officer/Military member and does happen but that's their job and there's ck's and balances too deal with that..... On the teachers end??? Not so much..... I'm not knocking any of you who would stand up and offer too carry too protect the children, but I got to say you're a little naive in your thinking.....

If you don't believe me take some tactical classes where you go above and beyond the CCW class where you get put into situations where you're not shooting straight on @ a target, shooting from behind objects with non-targets in the line of fire in low light conditions and so forth.... Not so cut and dry at that point.... Like I said, not knocking anyone but there's more too it than just taking a class and strapping it on especially when kids are involved....

Very good points and I completely agree, but if security will not be provided what is the answer?

I'm just thinking of last resort if the situation arises. What defense do we have? I know what my building has... ZERO. I have a crisis bag with a flashlight in it.

 

[brock ratcliff]

They should not be left defenseless IMO. Not the kids, not the faculty. As someone said, what if that principal would have greeted that nut with a .45 instead of trying to stand in his way? It's a bad world, letting pussies make policy is wrong in this environment. It's time to put the politically correct fell good bs aside IMO. I don't want my kid's teachers and staff left to ask a nut-job how they can make him feel better about himself to diffuse a situation. BANG, case closed.

 

[brock ratcliff]

Teacher's Unions cry about some really dumb issues, IMO. This is one issue they should be spearheading.

 

["J"]

Brock, you've got police officers who can't hit the broadside of a barn when it gets real..... 120 rounds into a car and a quarter of them hit the target up around Akron this year..... Kids running around kids being the shooter..... I get your point and can't come up with a better answer but I know I don't like the one you're talking about..... Will it work??? Who knows it may but it may also do more harm then good as well.... All I know is something needs addressed in securing the buildings.... Armed teachers or armed security??? I'd go with the security..... Like I said earlier, we're going too be having a lot of the Guardsman with little too do here in the near future......

 

[cotty16]

I'm telling you, security is not an option. Schools won't pay for it and neither will anyone else.

Our superintendent sent out a mass email today. "Be sure to be extra vigilant in regard to who you let in the building."

Really? That's gonna stop some ass who breaks a window to get in?

It's a sad world that we even have to have this discussion.

 

[COB-TY]

SOMETHING has to be done and taking guns away from lawbiding citizens is NOT THE ANSWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Jackalope]

I think a levy to pay an armed security/k9 unit would suffice.

Agreed.. For some reason they can spend Levy money for crap like Ipads and new floors. But not armed security?

 

[cotty16]

Agreed.. For some reason they can spend Levy money for crap like Ipads and new floors. But not armed security?

Districts have mandated technology money and school improvement money that is set aside annually. That money is to be spent only on those items. Use it or lose it. It is not allowed to be used to pay a teacher's salary or anything of that nature.

If security were to be hired it would have to come out of operating funds which are scarce. We continually cut positions just to function. Most districts around the country are in the same boat financially.

So, new floors, new windows, new ipads are a completely seperate issue. I wish they weren't, but they are.

 

[Milo]

http://www.examiner.com/article/off-duty-texas-deputy-stops-theater-shooting?cid=rss

 

[rgecko23]

http://www.examiner.com/article/texas-school-district-will-allow-teachers-to-carry-guns

 

[Jackalope]

Districts have mandated technology money and school improvement money that is set aside annually. That money is to be spent only on those items. Use it or lose it. It is not allowed to be used to pay a teacher's salary or anything of that nature.

If security were to be hired it would have to come out of operating funds which are scarce. We continually cut positions just to function. Most districts around the country are in the same boat financially.

So, new floors, new windows, new ipads are a completely seperate issue. I wish they weren't, but they are.

I understand the color of money when it comes to budgets. But I also understand that's a pretty sad excuse. To me it say.. New floors, lockers, and Ipads are more important than children's safety. When in reality, their safety should be paramount above all else.

 

[cotty16]

I totally agree with you, but these funds are mandated by the state. Every district has to use a certain percent of their budget for school improvements and for technology. So the new floors that schools may get have nothing to with being able to afford security or more teachers. They are sepearte funds.

So, in a sense, districts have 3 kitties to use.
1. School improvemnets
2. School technology
3. Operations

Money from one cannot be used to pay for another. It is against state policy. Security would fall under operations and with so many districts cutting positions, how can they hire security?

If schools could move money from one area to another I am sure they would, but their hands are tied. Maybe the state will rethink how money should be spent and make a mandatory budget for school security personnel.

Trust me, we have teachers bitch about "how can our elementary schhol get new windows when they can't afford to keep teachers?"
The answer is that money cannot be used for anything else. Even if the school doesn't need improvements, you have to use the money for that.
Our community was irrate a few years ago because our HS got the track resurfaced, but were laying off teachers. It's the state's policy and it's messed up.
each district should be allowed to spend their money how they want. Then maybe security could be in the budget.

 

[Jackalope]

I totally agree with you, but these funds are mandated by the state. Every district has to use a certain percent of their budget for school improvements and for technology. So the new floors that schools may get have nothing to with being able to afford security or more teachers. They are sepearte funds.

So, in a sense, districts have 3 kitties to use.
1. School improvemnets
2. School technology
3. Operations

Money from one cannot be used to pay for another. It is against state policy. Security would fall under operations and with so many districts cutting positions, how can they hire security?

If schools could move money from one area to another I am sure they would, but their hands are tied. Maybe the state will rethink how money should be spent and make a mandatory budget for school security personnel.

Trust me, we have teachers bitch about "how can our elementary schhol get new windows when they can't afford to keep teachers?"
The answer is that money cannot be used for anything else. Even if the school doesn't need improvements, you have to use the money for that.
Our community was irrate a few years ago because our HS got the track resurfaced, but were laying off teachers. It's the state's policy and it's messed up.
each district should be allowed to spend their money how they want. Then maybe security could be in the budget.

I get what you're saying man. I understand the color of money, but I also understand priorities. Budgetary rules, limits, and amounts can always be changed somewhere.

 

[Flatlander]

The thing that keeps eating at me is that you're going too ask these teachers too act as police officers and put them in situations where they may or may not function too the level needed.... Then if the shit hits the fan, the teacher acts on it and God forbid misses and kills a kid..... Now what??? Yeah it can happen with a police officer/Military member and does happen but that's their job and there's ck's and balances too deal with that..... On the teachers end??? Not so much..... I'm not knocking any of you who would stand up and offer too carry too protect the children, but I got to say you're a little naive in your thinking.....

If you don't believe me take some tactical classes where you go above and beyond the CCW class where you get put into situations where you're not shooting straight on @ a target, shooting from behind objects with non-targets in the line of fire in low light conditions and so forth.... Not so cut and dry at that point.... Like I said, not knocking anyone but there's more too it than just taking a class and strapping it on especially when kids are involved....

j, you make some good points, but I would say a lot of citizens are not trained either but they know when to defend their life. I don't think a teacher should have the same authority as a police officer, meaning different criteria for pulling a firearm, but they should be able to use deadly force if a gun is pulled on them or a student.

 

[moundhill]

I agree to a point j. But I think that just the fact of knowing teachers may be carrying would make these psychos think twice before entering a school or public place. They would have a fear that their sick fugged up thoughts may be ruined because people CAN actually defend themselves. Just my thoughts.