Should teachers be allowed to pack a gun?

[Sheriff Uling 3]

There would be no need for detention if teachers carried guns... Hehehehehe!!!

[mawilson 2,133]

I think for the possibility of stopping a mass murderer who kills 30 once every 15 years, you'd have two or three incidents yearly at one or two bodies each.

Call me crazy, but I'd rather have 100 deaths over a period of 15 years than 30 deaths in one day.

[Peikko 1,575]

You are crazy!

[trailmix 77]

you may trust 911 to save you, i'll dial smith and wesson

for those all up in arms (no pun intended) about liability, why not suggest the teacher front a bond for this to cover lawsuits should the worst happen?

I can't believe you said that and - a bond in case the worst happens.

Yes, as long as they have a bond it should be just dandy.

[Caladan 19]

I think it's important to get the question straight. I am guessing, from the discussion here, that the question isn't about everyday security (which shouldn't be the job of underpaid teachers), but about deranged students.

Someone as deranged as the VT killer isn't going to decide not to go on with his doomsday plan because he thinks it's possible that a teacher has a concealed weapon. He's mentally ill. It's not a deterrent to the crazies.

Let's assume all the teachers are competent and well-trained and none of them ever have mental health problems. Still -- which do we think is the greater risk? A mass murder, or an accident? Whether it's a rowdy kid knowing he can settle the score if he gets ahold of the teacher's gun, or the usual run of school violence taking a nasty turn.

I think for the possibility of stopping a mass murderer who kills 30 once every 15 years, you'd have two or three incidents yearly at one or two bodies each.

surely an acceptable number, eh?

Not great, but I'd go for a lower number rather than a higher number, wouldn't you?

I know we only think of the teacher as the potential hero (who is everywhere at all times to shoot mass murderers), but it's not that hard to overpower someone with a gun if they're not expecting it.

So two kids get in a fight, the teacher comes over to break them up (not drawing a weapon, because you don't pull a gun on kids having a fistfight), the kid decks the teacher, takes the gun and what could have been a potential hallway fight ending in nothing ends in a dead kid or teacher.

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

you may trust 911 to save you, i'll dial smith and wesson

for those all up in arms (no pun intended) about liability, why not suggest the teacher front a bond for this to cover lawsuits should the worst happen?

I can't believe you said that and - a bond in case the worst happens.

Yes, as long as they have a bond it should be just dandy.

a figurative bone for the gun grabbers to fight over since many of them seem so concerned about lawsuits.

[Ban Hammer 14,269]

I think it's important to get the question straight. I am guessing, from the discussion here, that the question isn't about everyday security (which shouldn't be the job of underpaid teachers), but about deranged students.

Someone as deranged as the VT killer isn't going to decide not to go on with his doomsday plan because he thinks it's possible that a teacher has a concealed weapon. He's mentally ill. It's not a deterrent to the crazies.

Let's assume all the teachers are competent and well-trained and none of them ever have mental health problems. Still -- which do we think is the greater risk? A mass murder, or an accident? Whether it's a rowdy kid knowing he can settle the score if he gets ahold of the teacher's gun, or the usual run of school violence taking a nasty turn.

I think for the possibility of stopping a mass murderer who kills 30 once every 15 years, you'd have two or three incidents yearly at one or two bodies each.

surely an acceptable number, eh?

Not great, but I'd go for a lower number rather than a higher number, wouldn't you?

I know we only think of the teacher as the potential hero (who is everywhere at all times to shoot mass murderers), but it's not that hard to overpower someone with a gun if they're not expecting it.

So two kids get in a fight, the teacher comes over to break them up (not drawing a weapon, because you don't pull a gun on kids having a fistfight), the kid decks the teacher, takes the gun and what could have been a potential hallway fight ending in nothing ends in a dead kid or teacher.

right, and a meteor could fall on them all too. while we're going to extremes, charles manson could break out of jail, dig up elvis and team up with jimmy hoffa for a raid on the school with light sabers

[Caladan 19]

Many women who buy guns for self-defense end up having the firearm used on them. I think a seventeen-year-old kid could overpower most of the teachers at my high school.

It's not as farfetched as a meteor attack, or say, maybe the crazy kid in the class is going to chain the doors and have a rampage where he tapes himself and mails it to NBC first. (How crazy! That would never happen!) It's just a question of odds. If many of the teachers are carrying guns, you increase the risk of one of them getting misused.

Remember, I'm saying two or three, across the country, per year. Not daily. Not often. But it doesn't have to be many to have a greater body count than the occasional school shooter.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think it's important to get the question straight. I am guessing, from the discussion here, that the question isn't about everyday security (which shouldn't be the job of underpaid teachers), but about deranged students.

Someone as deranged as the VT killer isn't going to decide not to go on with his doomsday plan because he thinks it's possible that a teacher has a concealed weapon. He's mentally ill. It's not a deterrent to the crazies.

Let's assume all the teachers are competent and well-trained and none of them ever have mental health problems. Still -- which do we think is the greater risk? A mass murder, or an accident? Whether it's a rowdy kid knowing he can settle the score if he gets ahold of the teacher's gun, or the usual run of school violence taking a nasty turn.

I think for the possibility of stopping a mass murderer who kills 30 once every 15 years, you'd have two or three incidents yearly at one or two bodies each.

surely an acceptable number, eh?

Not great, but I'd go for a lower number rather than a higher number, wouldn't you?

I know we only think of the teacher as the potential hero (who is everywhere at all times to shoot mass murderers), but it's not that hard to overpower someone with a gun if they're not expecting it.

So two kids get in a fight, the teacher comes over to break them up (not drawing a weapon, because you don't pull a gun on kids having a fistfight), the kid decks the teacher, takes the gun and what could have been a potential hallway fight ending in nothing ends in a dead kid or teacher.

right, and a meteor could fall on them all too. while we're going to extremes, charles manson could break out of jail, dig up elvis and team up with jimmy hoffa for a raid on the school with light sabers

Remember Prince Philips' comments about cricket bats after Dunblane?

[Heracles 417]

Someone of authority on campus should have access to a restricted weapons cabinet or room. Not only against kids going crazy but also against, worst case scenario, a beslan style school crisis happening in the US.

At the very least the school should carry non lethal hardware such as pepper spray and a taser..

Edited September 18, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[mawilson 2,133]

You are crazy!

I may be crazy, but it doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Otherwise we could just say,

"#### Homeland Security! Let the suicide bombers come and blow up as many

people as they want. The money would be better spent improving road safety

and tackling obesity. After all, statistically, car accidents and heart disease kill

a lot more people than suicide bombs."

Not great, but I'd go for a lower number rather than a higher number, wouldn't you?

Not necessarily -- see above.

[Peikko 1,575]

Indeed we could say Homeland security isn't doing that much to prevent suicide bombers because not much is going to prevent suicide bombers. If there are people in the US who are programmed to do this, they will succeed.

[KarenCee 3]

Guns have no place in classrooms.

I totally agree. In our school, NO ONE is allowed through the halls UNLESS they have come through the front office first and signs in, complete with visitor or volunteer sticker on their shirt or jacket. We do occasionally have non custodial parents who aren't allowed to see or have any contact with their child. They aren't allowed through the side door to the hallways. Should one show up and there is a problem, the sheriff's office will be quick to respond, as they have in the past. I would hope all schools have this type policy in place. With that being said, I would hope this teacher's school would have a similar policy and that the administration would know NOT to allow this man to enter the school. If she has an outside door, as some schools do, maybe she could transfer to an inside classroom. There are ways to be protected without bringing a gun to school. What she does with it outside the classroom and off school property is her own business.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Indeed we could say Homeland security isn't doing that much to prevent suicide bombers because not much is going to prevent suicide bombers. If there are people in the US who are programmed to do this, they will succeed.

Those billboard ads in the London Tube showing an empty carriage with an 'suspicious' bag on the seat with the caption "Is it yours?" remind me a lot of those old Duck and Cover ads...

[Jaseball 0]

Guns have no place in classrooms.

I totally agree. In our school, NO ONE is allowed through the halls UNLESS they have come through the front office first and signs in, complete with visitor or volunteer sticker on their shirt or jacket. We do occasionally have non custodial parents who aren't allowed to see or have any contact with their child. They aren't allowed through the side door to the hallways. Should one show up and there is a problem, the sheriff's office will be quick to respond, as they have in the past. I would hope all schools have this type policy in place. With that being said, I would hope this teacher's school would have a similar policy and that the administration would know NOT to allow this man to enter the school. If she has an outside door, as some schools do, maybe she could transfer to an inside classroom. There are ways to be protected without bringing a gun to school. What she does with it outside the classroom and off school property is her own business.

I'm sure the nut job is going to go sign in, get a hall pass, respect your rules, get a sticker, and then move past the front office into the hallways before mowing people down.

If some nut comes into the office with a two taped 30 round mags or a 100 round mag AK-47 and a few side arms and knives I'm pretty sure mowing down the front office wouldn't be much of an issue.

Why do some people always think rules, laws, and regulations protect them? These things are only effective against law abiding citizens. Sociopaths, obsessed people, and criminals DON"T CARE.

In any given scenario an armed, trained, and registered citizen with a firearm is your best chance to escape with minimal damage. A trained person knows how to secure their weapon and would have basic hand to hand to help prevent losing their weapon. A person at the scene can react immediately instead of having to wait for someone to arrive on scene and then wait for instructions.

The only way you can realistically stop a gun man is by shooting them. An armed man shooting unarmed people quickly justifies a 'deadly force,' response. If you gave me pepper spray, a taser or a baton and told me to stay in a classroom to protect students from a gun man I am going to toss a chair or table through a window, cover the sill with a jacket and run the hell away.