Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Small sample sizes in polls don't let you predict presidential elections either! The polls were all wrong!

 AndrewC wrote:

And to everyone, has anyone actually asked teachers/principles if they are willing to CCW?

There are already voluntary training programs for armed teachers starting up. And there are certainly teachers who already have a CCW. I don't think people are saying to give every teacher or require every teacher to have a CCW. The idea seems to be more to allow the teachers who already have CCWs or choose to get CCWs to carry in school.

I was under the impression that the answer the gun lobby put forward was a blanket mandatory carry for principles/teachers in all schools to prevent such a thing from happening again.

I see that I was wrong on that.

Thanks for the answer though.

Andrew

Edited for spelling, better go back to school :(

 AndrewC wrote:


CptJake, still no suggestions?
And to everyone, has anyone actually asked teachers/principles if they are willing to CCW?

Sure it's been asked...

Also, in Ohio, there was a recent story that a bunch of teachers signed up for some training already.

Actually, a good frind of my wife's is a teacher in New Mexico just north of El Paso, and she has a conceal carry permit and wishes she could carry at school.


She (the teacher) posted the following to facebook soon after Sandy Hook:




As for further suggestions, why?

My goal is to keep my freedoms I currently have and ensure my kids enjoy the same freedoms. Enforce current laws, and address the mental health issues. I don't see a gun issue that can prevent Sandy Hook type events, and won't come up with solutions that compromise my current rights with no real gain for anyone but politicians.

If people REALLY care about The Children, they'll take actual measures that save more than 100 or so a year (and that is assuming you could prevent every Sandy Hook type incident, and you cannot). Again, fill in all the swimming pools and outlaw inlfatable pools and you save several thousand kids a year. Surely that is as reasonable as taking draconian gun control measures that won't prevent even 100 children from being capped?

Considering that the same people also freak the feth out if the evil government tells them that the kids have to wear helmets or the parents have to pay a fine, I don't really care what they think.

Pilots got armed and they have had more negligent discharges in the cockpit than prevented hijacks, so keep armed teachers away from my kids. If teachers get the right to be armed at work then I better get the right to have my kids bused at school expense to a gun free school. I will decide which people I trust to be armed while they are in charge of my kids.

 d-usa wrote:
Considering that the same people also freak the feth out if the evil government tells them that the kids have to wear helmets or the parents have to pay a fine, I don't really care what they think.

Pilots got armed and they have had more negligent discharges in the cockpit than prevented hijacks, so keep armed teachers away from my kids. If teachers get the right to be armed at work then I better get the right to have my kids bused at school expense to a gun free school. I will decide which people I trust to be armed while they are in charge of my kids.

d... I know you and I disagree on many things...

But you keep referencing the armed pilots... do you think that it's now known that the pilots are armed, that it deters would be hijackers?

These things aren't necessarily there to actually stop the bad guys, but also DETER future nutso... am I comletely wrong in this?

CptJake wrote:


As for further suggestions, why?

I asked because everytime someone suggests something you shoot it down, and this gives the impression, or at least gave me the impression of someone who didn't care what happens so long as you aren't disturbed. Or as the UK would put it "I'm all right Jack!"

My goal is to keep my freedoms I currently have and ensure my kids enjoy the same freedoms. Enforce current laws, and address the mental health issues. I don't see a gun issue that can prevent Sandy Hook type events, and won't come up with solutions that compromise my current rights with no real gain for anyone but politicians.

This explains your position better, but then if you don't engage, you wont get a compromise. Ignoring the problem won't make it go away. Which is it cheaper for the Govt to do, legislate (and pay) against gun owners or legislate (and pay) for the entire population of America?

If people REALLY care about The Children, they'll take actual measures that save more than 100 or so a year (and that is assuming you could prevent every Sandy Hook type incident, and you cannot). Again, fill in all the swimming pools and outlaw inlfatable pools and you save several thousand kids a year. Surely that is as reasonable as taking draconian gun control measures that won't prevent even 100 children from being capped?

You know that this isn't about caring for the children, this is about legislating against guns. 'Children' is merely the excuse that politicians will use.

Cheers

Andrew

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Considering that the same people also freak the feth out if the evil government tells them that the kids have to wear helmets or the parents have to pay a fine, I don't really care what they think.

Pilots got armed and they have had more negligent discharges in the cockpit than prevented hijacks, so keep armed teachers away from my kids. If teachers get the right to be armed at work then I better get the right to have my kids bused at school expense to a gun free school. I will decide which people I trust to be armed while they are in charge of my kids.

d... I know you and I disagree on many things...

But you keep referencing the armed pilots... do you think that it's now known that the pilots are armed, that it deters would be hijackers?

These things aren't necessarily there to actually stop the bad guys, but also DETER future nutso... am I comletely wrong in this?

Considering that we have had how many instances of people storming the door since 9/11, and that they cannot get past the secured doors anyway, and that there are Marshall's on board with guns as well to stop non-cockpit attacks, and considering that the marshals have not stopped anything either and that all attacks since arming pilots and adding more Marshall's were stopped by unarmed passengers and flight staff...

I don't think that a guy with a gun behind a door you cannot get past anyway and who have managed to shoot the airplane they are flying has proven to be much of a deterrent.

 d-usa wrote:
Pilots got armed and they have had more negligent discharges in the cockpit than prevented hijacks, so keep armed teachers away from my kids. If teachers get the right to be armed at work then I better get the right to have my kids bused at school expense to a gun free school. I will decide which people I trust to be armed while they are in charge of my kids.

Well said. If the NYPD hits 9 civilians for ever armed assailant they aim at, I'd hate to see how even more poorly trained teachers do.

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Considering that the same people also freak the feth out if the evil government tells them that the kids have to wear helmets or the parents have to pay a fine, I don't really care what they think.

Pilots got armed and they have had more negligent discharges in the cockpit than prevented hijacks, so keep armed teachers away from my kids. If teachers get the right to be armed at work then I better get the right to have my kids bused at school expense to a gun free school. I will decide which people I trust to be armed while they are in charge of my kids.

d... I know you and I disagree on many things...

But you keep referencing the armed pilots... do you think that it's now known that the pilots are armed, that it deters would be hijackers?

These things aren't necessarily there to actually stop the bad guys, but also DETER future nutso... am I comletely wrong in this?

Considering that we have had how many instances of people storming the door since 9/11, and that they cannot get past the secured doors anyway, and that there are Marshall's on board with guns as well to stop non-cockpit attacks, and considering that the marshals have not stopped anything either and that all attacks since arming pilots and adding more Marshall's were stopped by unarmed passengers and flight staff...

I don't think that a guy with a gun behind a door you cannot get past anyway and who have managed to shoot the airplane they are flying has proven to be much of a deterrent.

Okay... you do have a valid point...

 Ouze wrote:
Well said. If the NYPD hits 9 civilians for ever armed assailant they aim at, I'd hate to see how even more poorly trained teachers do.

If we were doing tag team gunfights and you gave me a choice of partner between your average cop and your average concealed weapon permit holder, I'd choose the latter every time.

 Seaward wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Well said. If the NYPD hits 9 civilians for ever armed assailant they aim at, I'd hate to see how even more poorly trained teachers do.

If we were doing tag team gunfights and you gave me a choice of partner between your average cop and your average concealed weapon permit holder, I'd choose the latter every time.

The best shots in the US are civilians. Hands down. The average permit holder probably gets more range time then the average cop. I know I do and I don't get to shoot near as much as I'd like to. The average LEO shoots once a year to qualify and that's it. Just being a cop does not make you a "gun guy" or even a decent pistol shooter.

You guys are missing the point. Someone posted a sign that obviously endorses arming school "staff"; presumably teachers (and hell,maybe janitors). Since police are the closest analogue of "civil servants the government arms, when their primary function is not warfare", and Seward insists on reminding us (accurately) that LEO's are notoriously bad shots, why would you think teachers would be better shots? Are they going to be required to qualify more often then the police?

More to the point, is this really in the wheelhouse of teachers to begin with? If you guys want to argue about putting a LEO in every school, that's a different plan, and we can talk about that, but this talk of arming teachers is just laughable.

I haven't seen any proposals requiring teachers to be armed.

I've seen some allowing teachers who choose to carry a concealed firearm do so on school property.

I think there's a big difference between the state arming teachers and allowing teachers who already have a CCW or choose to get a CCW to carry in school.

 Hordini wrote:
I think there's a big difference between the state arming teachers and allowing teachers who already have a CCW or choose to get a CCW to carry in school.

There is. Though, minimally, I think most parents would favor some form of additional (and ongoing) certification.

 Seaward wrote:
I haven't seen any proposals requiring teachers to be armed.

Well, I haven't seen a proposal for federal agents to"take your guns", but here we are, 10 pages and 285 posts later.

 dogma wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
I think there's a big difference between the state arming teachers and allowing teachers who already have a CCW or choose to get a CCW to carry in school.

There is. Though, minimally, I think most parents would favor some form of additional (and ongoing) certification.

I think it's a sensible idea, if we actually decide to let teachers with CCWs carry in school. Maybe they could standardize these teacher CCW courses that are popping up, and if teachers want to carry in school, they have to take the course and re-qualify every year. If the school district has money to burn on it, they can reimburse the teacher, and if not the teachers who want to carry can pay for the training themselves.

 Ouze wrote:
Well, I haven't seen a proposal for federal agents to"take your guns", but here we are, 10 pages and 285 posts later.

If we use New York as a guide, it'd be state agents, anyway.

I don't think I've ever heard of a teacher snapping and hitting a child before... and I've certainly never heard of someone working in a school doing the same...or worse.

So yeah, lets allow teachers to carry guns to protect children.

 SilverMK2 wrote:
I don't think I've ever heard of a teacher snapping and hitting a child before... and I've certainly never heard of someone working in a school doing the same...or worse.

So yeah, lets allow teachers to carry guns to protect children.

Yeah, I know what you mean. Teachers obviously aren't intelligent or responsible enough to be expected to handle something like a firearm safely. Even if they had proper training I'm sure they'd find a way to screw it up. That's why we can only entrust them with things that allow them to do the least amount of damage to society, like educating kids. Really, after seeing the evidence you've provided, I think it's clear that teachers are the real danger. We should pull all the children out of school to protect them from the violent teachers! If every parent home-schooled their kids, maybe we'd have fewer school shootings.

 Ouze wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
I haven't seen any proposals requiring teachers to be armed.

Well, I haven't seen a proposal for federal agents to"take your guns", but here we are, 10 pages and 285 posts later.

I saw a sound byte of a Congressman saying just that, but I'm having a real hard time finding it again. I'll keep digging.

 dogma wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
I think there's a big difference between the state arming teachers and allowing teachers who already have a CCW or choose to get a CCW to carry in school.

There is. Though, minimally, I think most parents would favor some form of additional (and ongoing) certification.

Then let them address that with their local school board and county gov't. It isn't a federal gov't issue.

As someone who recently moved to the US from Ireland just before the debate over firearms kicked off I can say that this thread is the most civil and informative one that I've read to date.

 Hordini wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:
I don't think I've ever heard of a teacher snapping and hitting a child before... and I've certainly never heard of someone working in a school doing the same...or worse.

So yeah, lets allow teachers to carry guns to protect children.

U


Yeah, I know what you mean. Teachers obviously aren't intelligent or responsible enough to be expected to handle something like a firearm safely. Even if they had proper training I'm sure they'd find a way to screw it up. That's why we can only entrust them with things that allow them to do the least amount of damage to society, like educating kids. Really, after seeing the evidence you've provided, I think it's clear that teachers are the real danger. We should pull all the children out of school to protect them from the violent teachers! If every parent home-schooled their kids, maybe we'd have fewer school shootings.

I 've seen enough idiot teachers to know I wouldn't want a wholesale arming of them. In my own experience, I was thrown over some desks after forgetting to sign my name on a science test by a teacher that went on to beat up a couple of other 6th graders at later dates I have also seen other teachers stressed out to the point where they physically attack students.
My wife's older sister had a teacher that fixated on her and threatened to kill her family if she left him. Add in the incompetence factor and chance of a student getting a gun away from a teacher and you have a good argument for not wanting teachers to have guns.

Relapse wrote:


I 've seen enough idiot teachers to know I wouldn't want a wholesale arming of them. In my own experience, I was thrown over some desks after forgetting to sign my name on a science test by a teacher that went on to beat up a couple of other 6th graders at later dates I have also seen other teachers stressed out to the point where they physically attack students.
My wife's older sister had a teacher that fixated on her and threatened to kill her family if she left him. Add in the incompetence factor and chance of a student getting a gun away from a teacher and you have a good argument for not wanting teachers to have guns.

Seems you are making one of my points for me, it is NOT a gun issue but a mental health issue. Thanks.

Jake


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting take on gun control:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/21/1172661/-How-to-Ban-Guns-A-step-by-step-long-term-process

Yes, I know the Daily Kos is not a politician/elected official and is close to the fringe. Having said that, I would be willing to bet that Sen Feinstein and her ilk would absolutely LOVE to see the above play out but is politically savy enough not to admit that anywhere near a camera or microphone.

CptJake wrote:

Relapse wrote:


I 've seen enough idiot teachers to know I wouldn't want a wholesale arming of them. In my own experience, I was thrown over some desks after forgetting to sign my name on a science test by a teacher that went on to beat up a couple of other 6th graders at later dates I have also seen other teachers stressed out to the point where they physically attack students.
My wife's older sister had a teacher that fixated on her and threatened to kill her family if she left him. Add in the incompetence factor and chance of a student getting a gun away from a teacher and you have a good argument for not wanting teachers to have guns.

Seems you are making one of my points for me, it is NOT a gun issue but a mental health issue. Thanks.

Jake


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting take on gun control:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/21/1172661/-How-to-Ban-Guns-A-step-by-step-long-term-process

Yes, I know the Daily Kos is not a politician/elected official and is close to the fringe. Having said that, I would be willing to bet that Sen Feinstein and her ilk would absolutely LOVE to see the above play out but is politically savy enough not to admit that anywhere near a camera or microphone.

The writer doesn't want his or her kids "being shot at by a deranged NRA member." How precious.
I like the part where people who own multiple guns who are NRA/GOA members are the people who warrant raids. I mean, lets not worry about all the firearms in the hands of gangs and drug dealers. NRA and GOA members are the people we should be worried about!

I would imagine that most people wouldn't want deranged NRA members shooting at their kids, but then I would think most people wouldn't want deranged people who aren't members of the NRA to shoot at their kids either. Come to think of it I doubt they would want anyone shooting at their kids regardless of lobby membership or mental state.

"He seemed calm, and he wasn't a member of the NRA, so I was ok with the killing spree at the playground."

 Ahtman wrote:
I would imagine that most people wouldn't want deranged NRA members shooting at their kids, but then I would think most people wouldn't want deranged people who aren't members of the NRA to shoot at their kids either. Come to think of it I doubt they would want anyone shooting at their kids regardless of lobby membership or mental state.

"He seemed calm, and he wasn't a member of the NRA, so I was ok with the killing spree at the playground."

You know, that's what I would think too. I certainly wouldn't want a deranged person shooting at anybody. That's why I'm not sure why the writer thought it was important enough to specifically mention NRA and GOA members, as if members of those groups are more likely to be deranged and start shooting people.