Deputize Teachers

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Any who do that are, shall we say, short sighted?

It's the first amendment for a reason.

originally posted by: howtonhawky
I believe that without any if much at all changes to laws that the police could deputize certain teachers.

The Pay would not have to be much if any but it would allow for some teachers to conceal carry in schools.

What say you ATS?

Oh dear gods no. We don't need more guns around school ... guns legally in school have been discharged, have wound up in the wrong hands, and have been used to kill spouses during domestic disputes. Why do you think adding more guns will help?

Let's spend that money on hiring more teachers, building more classrooms (and not those outdoor quonset huts), giving us smaller classes and raises for getting additional certifications and degrees. Let's trim those mandatory tests and give us back arts programs and music programs and skills programs. Let's move in peer counseling groups and a bit more social activity.

We don't need to turn our schools into armed prisons.

And guns in Inner city schools? That's just asking for trouble.

originally posted by: Byrd
We don't need to turn our schools into armed prisons.

That seems like a bit of hyperbole to me and it's not what people are suggesting. It's exaggeration like that which makes having an adult conversation about a serious issue impossible.

This is not a Left / Right issue at all. It's about how do you stop a nut with a gun when they enter a school and start shooting. If the school is not prepared to defend the students, it's on the school which is trusted to provide a safe place for the kids.

What would be your method to defend the kids after a shooter enters or is trying to enter? Waiting five minutes or more, plus the time it takes for someone to make the 911 call won't do. I see these incidents last on average 3 minutes. Seriously how would you protect the kids?

a reply to: Byrd

Does the posting of armed guards, who actually know their business, really render schools into prisons?

Bit of a hyperbolic reach there.

That's only part of a solution, if indeed it is one. The solutions, since there's more than one issue, lie long before a would be shooter is confronted by the armed guard.

I'd rather the schools be "prisons", than the shooting galleries we've seen in the past. Of the two, prisons will at least send the kids home at the end of the day, rather than to hospital/or worse.

a reply to: Blaine91555

You said it better than I.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
This is not a Left / Right issue at all. It's about how do you stop a nut with a gun when they enter a school and start shooting.

If a nut gets as far as a school entrance with a gun, there is only the slimmest chance to stop them before they do harm. There are some opportunities before that, but we tend to prefer to deal with our crimes after they've been committed. It's more economical.

a reply to: seagull

Does the posting of armed guards, who actually know their business, really render schools into prisons?

Pretty much. Both schools and prisons have the purpose of forming their "inmates" in to functional members of society. The main difference is that prisons have guards that will put those inmates down of they act up too much.

The exact same act we'd be asking these guards to perform.

originally posted by: neo96
How bout we just end public school and just teach kids at home?

Two birds one stone.

Internet Schools!

You're assuming the parents know how to teach. The average reading level of an adult is 6th grade. Good luck teaching above your competency. By 8th grade you should know enough math to be able to use Excel fluently, yet 50% of the adult population can't do it.

You're scared of a dumbed down population? Home schooling will dumb people down a lot.

originally posted by: lordcomac
That would pretty much end the stranglehold on our country in one generation, actually. Lots of birds.

Imagine a world where people are raised learning how to think instead of learning to memorize and parrot what they were told by their local authority figure?

Imagine a country where people are limited in their education by the ignorance of their parents.

originally posted by: Blueracer
Arm the children!

No need. Lets give them all fashionable body armor and call it a next generation school uniform.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: eNumbra

You're missing the point, though--kids and people who shoot up schools and theaters and shopping malls are statistical outliers as well.

That's my point--we never know who it will affect in this way because it is such a statistical anomaly that we have no way to predict it or even pinpoint the problem.

It being a statistical outlier precludes it from being THE problem. Billions of others not being affected in the same way, and the same violence existing prior to the prevalence of the same violent media means said violent media isn’t the causal factor.

originally posted by: neo96
How bout we just end public school and just teach kids at home?

Two birds one stone.

Internet Schools!

Are these kids staying home alone ? If not who is going to compensate the parents for giving up their job to stay home and teach the children or are the parents going to get the teachers pay instead?

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
You are pretending that the mental chemistry of everyone reacts in the same way to all things.

That could not be further from the truth.

You must keep in mind that it's not the "average" mentally stable individual that takes up arms and shoots up schools, so yes, it is absolutely possible that movies, video games, and many other media-related catalysts could cause an unhealthy problem to get worse, leading to what we see like in Florida. IT might also initiate unhealthy problems that may otherwise have not manifested.

American movie, TV, and especially video games are enjoyed all over the world though. Why does such a large cultural influence only cause violence here if there's anything to this theory?

originally posted by: murphy22
OP I get where you are going and I agree. But the "Police" are not who needs to do it. The County Sheriff's need to deputize teachers. City police are not "law enforcement", they are ordinance and and code enforcement.
When is the last time you voted for a "Police Chief"? Yeah, I didn't think so.
But I get where you are going. I agree every "teacher" should have the full force of the law behind them. They should probably be issued "badges" as well.
There's a reason there's no "police stations" being attacked by not jobs. Hmm? I wonder why?
But we can't make society so safe, that LEO'S will be out of work. Probably have to "bargain" with your local "police union" on that.
Can't have people handling their own "safety". The SWAT teams will be back dropping their heels, writing parking tickets.

I've been out of high school for a while now. However, I went to a really good private school... our sports coaches moved on to running national and college teams, our teachers were great, our test scores were really high, and so on. Even then, we had a couple really weird teachers. One who sticks out in my mind was a massive pervert. He was a real upstanding pillar of the community, but he had a penchant for teenage girls in school girl uniforms, and that's why he taught where he did.

I bring this up because one of the big issues in recent years has been teachers sexually abusing students. We've seen it happen with police too, where they use the power of the gun and their authority to get their way with victims. Would it really be the best idea to give teachers who may be sexual predators guns for additional leverage over students?

And if we say we'll screen teachers and only give them to the morally sound, if we can't entrust our teacher with a weapon, can we really entrust them with our kids in the first place? It seems to me that society completely lacks in the judgement necessary scrutinze who gets a weapon.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
That seems like a bit of hyperbole to me and it's not what people are suggesting. It's exaggeration like that which makes having an adult conversation about a serious issue impossible.

I'm sorry, but that's exactly what people are suggesting. Parkland was fenced in. The gates were only opened for a few minutes each day to let people in and out. Armed guards were walking the halls. They had metal detectors. There was no way to simply leave the premises, and the entire day was rigidly structured.

Now we're talking about adding more armed guards.

I think this is absurd. Putting aside all the arguments about morality, safety, and everything else... the very soul of America is freedom. Being placed under armed guard all day long erodes that freedom and conditions people to accept a police state. I have a very big problem with that.

What would be your method to defend the kids after a shooter enters or is trying to enter? Waiting five minutes or more, plus the time it takes for someone to make the 911 call won't do. I see these incidents last on average 3 minutes. Seriously how would you protect the kids?

Serious answer: Strict controls on ammunition.
Sarcastic answer: Body armor as a school uniform.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

No...

The school is, as these things go, at least partially voluntary. You can go where you please, unless that's drastically changed, as you have school choice--as much as some want to change that, too (but a topic for another thread).

Prison, you're pretty much stuck where they put you... Again, last I heard.

There is a quantifiable difference between the two, even with the addition of an armed guard or however many.

But...if you've a better suggestion, let's have it. As long as it's one that doesn't curtail the rights of folks who've done, and will do, no one any harm, I'm willing to listen.

a reply to: seagull

Kids have very little choice as to what school they go to. Parents hold all the power in determining where they go. Just as the state determines what prison a criminal goes to.

originally posted by: Blaine91555

What would be your method to defend the kids after a shooter enters or is trying to enter? Waiting five minutes or more, plus the time it takes for someone to make the 911 call won't do. I see these incidents last on average 3 minutes. Seriously how would you protect the kids?

Lock the door, call, and get everyone hidden.

Yeah, I know... you think it's ineffective. But let's be real: I'm a 68 year old woman. I'm slow, I don't see well, and I'm not very strong. I appreciate that you think I may be a closet Rambo, but I assure you this is not so. IF it happens, I will move my students to a safe place and I will be the last one in the door.

And yes, I'm prepared to take a bullet for them. Or several.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Byrd

Does the posting of armed guards, who actually know their business, really render schools into prisons?

I assume you saw the story today about the guard.

That's only part of a solution, if indeed it is one. The solutions, since there's more than one issue, lie long before a would be shooter is confronted by the armed guard.

And it can easily start with teachers having more time and resources to deal with students and a smaller class size. Teachers have stopped many tragedies even before they started.

I'd rather the schools be "prisons", than the shooting galleries we've seen in the past. Of the two, prisons will at least send the kids home at the end of the day, rather than to hospital/or worse.

But aren't you one of those who thinks the modern school does a lot of disservice to our kids?

I don't think that kind of atmosphere will help.

a reply to: seagull

Does the posting of armed guards, who actually know their business, really render schools into prisons?

When we talk about that, my mind conjures up a scene of a prison, like a real prison with a fifteen foot wall around it, and barbed wire a few feet beyond that, and of course the "watch towers", with armed guards and binoculars. Like TV.

If this keeps up, will we go to that? Wouldn't it be simpler to take away rapid-fire firearms? Congressmen/women can live without their NRA money. We do.

And so, tonight I hear the armed officer on the school grounds didn't go in. He just stood there outside.

Was he standing there trying to make a decision as to whether to commit suicide? A hand gun, up against a rapid-fire rifle, or whatever they are. Can we ask police officers to do that? If a shooter like that just had a hand-gun, the officers would have a chance. This way they don't, and it's unfair and inhumane to ask them to.

I have a friend on a SWAT team. I wouldn't even want to him walk into that. Not with that kind of weapon being used.
We have to get rid of them. Period.