United States & Gun Control discussion.

[Diamondback 2/2]

How many teachers faced that, 5 - 10 maybe? Hardly a significant number. We might be all surprised by how many teachers want to be armed, but Im pretty sure most won't want them. That said, if any of them want them I'm all for it.

How many pilots ended up being armed?

Now those are some valid points. The last question says a lot though. We will allow a guy who is supposed to fly an airplane full of people to have a gun...crazy I tell you. Who is flying the plane?:-" Regardless how many are armed now, the big point, is that we allowed them the choice.

 

[Chopstick]

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/n...ssociation.aspx?s&st&ps#.UND3aZfq-u8.facebook

The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters – and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown.
Out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency, we have given time for mourning, prayer and a full investigation of the facts before commenting.
The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.
The NRA is planning to hold a major news conference in the Washington, DC area on Friday, December 21.
Details will be released to the media at the appropriate time.

 

[Ex3]

Now those are some valid points. The last question says a lot though. We will allow a guy who is supposed to fly an airplane full of people to have a gun...crazy I tell you. Who is flying the plane?:-" Regardless how many are armed now, the big point, is that we allowed them the choice.

True we did and I think it was a good call. But those pilots are behind a reinforced locked door by themselves, not in a hallway full of rambunctious junior high school kids. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to teachers that are well-trained and willing to carry a weapon, but I still think the school's liability insurance would go through the roof.

 

[parallel]

I respectfully disagree. How many veterans do you think teach school? I would say there are quite a few teachers I would rather have a gun instead of some retired LEO sitting out in his car (they're retired for a reason). It's easy for a person to discover the sleeping habits (sorry, work habits) of security out front, and their movement patterns, instead of worrying about which room possesses a teacher with a weapon. A security guard making entry into a building vs a teacher inside with knowledge of where their kids are and where contact is coming from. A security guard with little SA as to what the hell is going on, is just more reactionary methods, just like a police response to an active shooter. A teacher inside a room can make a determination of whether or not the locked door is going to keep a shooter out, and when breached they're the last line.

Indeed... I can guarandamntee ya that I (a technical college instructor) would out perform a security guard... not because I'm some high speed low drag tier one whatchamacallit... but because I'm THERE and I have a vested interest in dispatching the piece of shit threatening my life.

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

True we did and I think it was a good call. But those pilots are behind a reinforced locked door by themselves, not in a hallway full of rambunctious junior high school kids. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to teachers that are well-trained and willing to carry a weapon, but I still think the school's liability insurance would go through the roof.

Good points, and I agree that it is not without reprecussions. Every action has a reaction.

 

[pardus]

Indeed... I can guarandamntee ya that I (a technical college instructor) would out perform a security guard... not because I'm some high speed low drag tier one whatchamacallit... but because I'm THERE and I have a vested interest in dispatching the piece of shit threatening my life.

How many of your colleagues feel the same way?

 

[parallel]

How anti gun can they be after they've been attacked and watched their kids dying, and all they could do was hide in a closet and hope for the best? I find it hard to believe when confronted with evil that one of them wouldn't pull a trigger to stop a crazy person from shooting up their coworkers and kids.

No teacher needs to be forced. Find a few who would, and would practice to keep up their skills. We armed pilots after 9/11...remember that uproar?

There are more (at least here in South Louisiana) teachers that are pro-firearm than one might imagine. The others... well... they would be liberals... which means that MANY of them have NO problem with guns for themselves... it's all of those OTHER people who can't be trusted. Unfortunately I'm starting to see a similar bias here... the right for a teacher (or anyone else for that matter) to defend themselves with a firearm shouldn't be dependent upon whether or not they can shoot like us. The test should be if they can safely handle a firearm and reasonably hit what they're shooting at. This whole thing about cops makes me literally LOL... I've seen cops who could barely qual on the standard Navy 48 round pistol course. My Mother-in-Law could out shoot a good 33% of the cops I served with.

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

Gov. Rick Perry on arming teachers....I don't know if I have said it in a while, but I love Texas!

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

Oregon Lawmaker also in support of armed teachers.

 

[Scotth]

No disrespect Scotth but I think you are way off the mark here and I have put a lot of time and thought into the actual problem. This recent incident is nothing new; it’s been going on for a really long time. However, when gun rights are being attacked (regardless the reason) people who support gun rights MUST stand up and present their own case.

I have actually quite a bit of training in the school active shooter situation, I am actually certified to teach LEO’s in the response to active shooters within a school. I have also spent the last 8.5 years studying the issue and what has remained the deciding factor in reducing the amount of human life lost has been the time at which the shooter takes his life, or is otherwise stopped by LE. LE had a major culture shock after examining the Columbine incident and realized that their response to an active shooter could not be the 4C’s (Contain, Control, Communicate, Call SWAT). That waiting for a response from SWAT officers would increase the odds of more life being lost. So they began several programs, training patrol officers, teachers, administrators and students in how to deal with the situation. Taking it further down to action vs reaction, it is common knowledge to most experts in active shooter response that the fastest way to stop the loss of life is someone being armed and stopping that active shooter immediately as they come into contact with them. That can be an armed security guard, an on/off duty LEO, or even a CCW holder.
<clipped for size>

I'm not taking anything you say as disrepectful JAB and the same goes for Worldweave and I would fully expect you to disagree with what I will say and look forward to your response. I think we are having a great discussion even if we disagree on the issue. At least we can all think about the issue from different perspectives.

I especially agree with your police response part. The 4c's were the pre-Columbine response and that has changed post Columbine.

To add a little bit to my previous post and try to answer one of your questions. Why barricading classrooms in a better solution. With electronic doors and electronic door stops you could setup all the schools doors to be shut an locked almost instantly from the classroom or the administration area so you could take decisive action to lock down the whole school whether people realized there is a problem or not. You would setup an emergency switch similar to a fire alarm that would cause all doors to shut and lock.

Why is that a better solution and to try an answer why it's not a good idea to arm teachers? Look at El Al Air. The Isreali's have never had a hijacked plane because they don't allow the bad guys to get into the cockpit. The same type of principle applies to school. You protect the children by not letting the bad guys get to the children. After 9/11 the US airlines took similar action with locking the cockpit. The Isreali's do it better but we are still good. The Isreali's also don't arm there pilots. In the US we arm our pilots. Of those armed pilots they have never used a weapon to defend the cockpit but we have had a cockpit shooting incident when a pilot accidently discharged there weapon and put a hole in the cockpit wall and luckily it didn't hit anyone or a critical system and it was at a low altitude so there wasn't a decompression issue. The lesson here is accidents can happen especially with the lightly trained people carrying. That doesn't mean I don't believe in CCW laws. I just think it's different carrying in the work enviroment and carrying personally.
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-03-26/us/pilot.gun_1_federal-flight-deck-officer-pilot-cockpit?_s=PM:US


The problem with having an armed teacher is if they are engaging the bad guy, who is managing their 30 kids? The other problem with an armed teacher is when the police arrive and are trying to find a bad guy they might have to engage a teacher searching for the bad guy or possibly in a gun fight with the bad guy. Either way an armed teacher can at best slow down the polices response and potentially put the teacher and police officer at greater risk. You can say well that armed teacher might have already ended the situation before the police got there and a just as likely outcome is the bad guy gets the teacher and now said bad guy has more guns and ammo then they brought to begin with.

 

[Scotth]

There are more (at least here in South Louisiana) teachers that are pro-firearm than one might imagine. The others... well... they would be liberals... which means that MANY of them have NO problem with guns for themselves... it's all of those OTHER people who can't be trusted. Unfortunately I'm starting to see a similar bias here... the right for a teacher (or anyone else for that matter) to defend themselves with a firearm shouldn't be dependent upon whether or not they can shoot like us. The test should be if they can safely handle a firearm and reasonably hit what they're shooting at. This whole thing about cops makes me literally LOL... I've seen cops who could barely qual on the standard Navy 48 round pistol course. My Mother-in-Law could out shoot a good 33% of the cops I served with.

The problem is an individuals action in the work environment is a liability to the company/school district etc. If that teacher engages a bad guy and accidently hits a student. That school district is going to face millions in lawsuits. If the police are the one that take action and hit the student accidently they are already setup for that liability and they have more legal cover then a company or that individual.

 

[parallel]

You have a good point... I've actually been told that I can NOT perform CPR on a student... I told them they would have to fire me after I came to the aid of one of my students because I wasn't going to stand by and watch them die. I fully expected them to fire me right there just for defying them.

 

[pardus]

You have a good point... I've actually been told that I can NOT perform CPR on a student... I told them they would have to fire me after I came to the aid of one of my students because I wasn't going to stand by and watch them die. I fully expected them to fire me right there just for defying them.

Are you CPR qualified?

 

[parallel]

Yep, but I'm not in the Nursing department.

 

[SkrewzLoose]

Wouldn't the good samaritan law cover that?
...assuming you cared about being told not to perform CPR.

 

[Chopstick]

Louisiana has Good Samaritan laws on the books. Im not a lawyer but I think perhaps your facility needs to talk to a risk manager specialist and tailor their employee handbook accordingly.

http://antir.chirurgeonguild.org/statute-us.php?state=LA

Title 9 §2793. Gratuitous service at scene of emergency; limitation on liability

1. No person who in good faith gratuitously renders emergency care, first aid or rescue at the scene of an emergency, or moves a person receiving such care, first aid or rescue to a hospital or other place of medical care shall be liable for any civil damages as a result of any act or omission in rendering the care or services or as a result of any act or failure to act to provide or arrange for further medical treatment or care for the person involved in the said emergency; provided, however, such care or services or transportation shall not be considered gratuitous, and this Section shall not apply when rendered incidental to a business relationship, including but not limited to that of employer-employee, existing between the person rendering such care or service or transportation and the person receiving the same, or when incidental to a business relationship existing between the employer or principal of the person rendering such care, service or transportation and the employer or principal of the person receiving such care, service or transportation. This Section shall not exempt from liability those individuals who intentionally or by grossly negligent acts or omissions cause damages to another individual.

 

[parallel]

Louisiana has Good Samaritan laws on the books. Im not a lawyer but I think perhaps your facility needs to talk to a risk manager specialist and tailor their employee handbook accordingly.

http://antir.chirurgeonguild.org/statute-us.php?state=LA

I AM faculty... the directive comes from the Regional Director. The mistake y'all are making is expecting something resembling reasonable thinking from bureaucrats... LOL

 

[pardus]

Yep, but I'm not in the Nursing department.

I AM faculty... the directive comes from the Regional Director. The mistake y'all are making is expecting something resembling reasonable thinking from bureaucrats... LOL

That is stupid.

 

[Chopstick]

I said your facility..meaning your school/employer. I realize you are faculty.
Do they have this in writing in an employee manual, not to render assistance?

 

[parallel]

I said your facility..meaning your school/employer. I realize you are faculty.
Do they have this in writing in an employee manual, not to render assistance?

Doh! I'm going blind I swear... no... not because of THAT... I hope.

I'm not sure... I'm only there to fix the program. They have discovered that the threats they use to keep others in check do NOT work on me. I gave myself five years to fix the program, it's been two and a half and I'm 85% there. I'm not a career educator and I don't intend to be... so all of these numbers they get their panties in a wad over and all of the other crap that doesn't matter to student development goes in one ear and out the other.