Armed Police in Every School?

Avatar for cmkristy
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2005
Armed Police in Every School?
19
Fri, 12-21-2012 - 12:20pm

One week after the tragedy in Newtown, Conn., the most powerful gun organization in the country weighed in today with a call for armed guards at all the nation's schools.

The National Rifle Association had remained largely silent since last Friday's shooting, but called what it billed as a "major news conference" this morning in Washington.

11:24 a.m. The NRA is creating what is calling a "model school shield program" to help improve security at schools It will be lead by former Rep. Asa Hutchinson and will be made available to every school that wants it free of charge, LaPierre says.

11:21 a.m.LaPierre calls on Congress to immediately appropriate money to put armed officers in every school in America. The conversation on this idea has to start immediately. He says the NRA has 11,000 police training instructors willing to help out.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/12/21/nra-press-conference-newtown-gun-control/1783227/

Do you agree? Should there be an armed police officer(s) in every school?

 photo snowsiggy.png

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Sun, 02-03-2013 - 7:37am

"Please share your stats on the relation to crime and people carrying guns because that is NOT the experience of many of us in countries where gun ownership is a priviledge not a right. "

I've seen this argument pop up here with every discussion concerning gun laws. One simply cannot compare the U.S. to other countries using one correlational fact.

The rate of mental illness in the U.S is higher then most other countries, illegal guns are more accessable in the U.S. then in other countries as well. There's just two facts that would alter the outcome of your belief that removing guns reduces the crime rate.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-27-2001
Thu, 01-17-2013 - 11:52pm

There was an armed guard at Columbine. There were MPs at Ft. Hood. Frankly, life has risks. As a kindergarten teacher, safety is my number one priority. In my opinion, my students are safer without weapons on campus.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Tue, 01-08-2013 - 1:42am

Sorting FBI data by violent crime rate uncovers some interesting results. The seven least violent states are all shall-issue right-to-carry (RTC). Of the seven most violent states, three are non-RTC (includes D.C.) Since about 75% of all states are RTC, 43% of the worst being non-RTC makes these states over-represented at the unpleasant end. The five states with the lowest murder rate are RTC, but two of the five worst are non-RTC. The eleven states with the lowest robbery rate are RTC, but of the eleven worst, 5 are non-RTC. Nine of 10 states with the lowest assault rates are RTC, while 3 of 10 with the highest rates are non-RTC. The only exception is in rates of rape, where three of the 10 lowest are non-RTC, while only one non-RTC state is in the 10 worst.

http://newsbusters.org/node/9140

In 1976, the Washington, D.C. City Council passed a law generally prohibiting residents from possessing handguns and requiring that all firearms in private homes be (1) kept unloaded and (2) rendered temporally inoperable via disassembly or installation of a trigger lock. The law became operative on Sept. 24, 1976.

During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law, while the U.S. murder rate averaged 11% lower.

• In 1982, the city of Chicago instituted a ban on handguns. This ban barred civilians from possessing handguns except for those registered with the city government prior to enactment of the law. The law also specified that such handguns had to be re-registered every two years or owners would forfeit their right to possess them. In 1994, the law was amended to require annual re-registration.

Since the outset of the Chicago handgun ban, the percentage of Chicago murders committed with handguns has averaged about 40% higher than it was before the law took effect.

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

After Hungerford [mass shooting], the British government banned semiautomatic rifles and brought shotguns—the last type of firearm that could be purchased with a simple show of fitness—under controls similar to those in place for pistols and rifles. Magazines were limited to two shells with a third in the chamber.

Firearms Act of 1998, which instituted a nearly complete ban on handguns. Owners of pistols were required to turn them in. The penalty for illegal possession of a pistol is up to 10 years in prison.

The results have not been what proponents of the act wanted. Within a decade of the handgun ban and the confiscation of handguns from registered owners, crime with handguns had doubled according to British government crime reports. Gun crime, not a serious problem in the past, now is.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

And no, shooters aren't "sick young men...who snapped"...they're "bad guys" who usually plan their killing sprees to maximize the carnage.

The Newtown shooter rigged his gun in order to reload more quickly...he destroyed his computer to cover his tracks...he chose bullets that would fragment because they cause more damage.

The Colorado shooter planned his attack for months...he purchased his ticket 2 weeks before his rampage...he booby-trapped his apartment to kill police...he bought his guns months before...he ordered his ammunition and body armor on line.

Evidence of pre-meditated murder...not someone who "snapped."  And in my opinion, the minute "some young kid"...a ridiculous description, by the way...raises a gun with the intent to murder other people, they show themselves to be animals who should be stopped at all costs, and I'd have no guilt or sorrow at seeing them put down.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009
Sun, 01-06-2013 - 2:12pm

Please share your stats on the relation to crime and people carrying guns because that is NOT the experience of many of us in countries where gun ownership is a priviledge not a right. In fact, in my country, crime stats are on the decline. We saw a dramatic drop in gun deaths and injuries when we tightened up our gun laws in the 1970s. 

Crime? Do you honestly think that a person's life is more important that some stuff? Stuff can be replaced but the life of some young kid, gang banger or not, can not. Property-related crimes are related to the economy, NOT gun ownership. So, please.. again clarify what stats you are referring to.

I find the NRA's reference to  "bad guys" very disturbing.  This was a sick young man who needed help; who snapped with tragic consequences. He was one of you; he wasn't "them".

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Thu, 01-03-2013 - 11:44pm

I really don't think a teacher shoul bear the reponsiblity of knowing how to be a trained " gun handleer" Based a  a case of what ifs.

I agree.  No teacher SHOULD be compelled to be a "gun handler"...but it might surprise you how many teachers are already gun owners,  or who would be interested in getting firearms training if it were offered, and who might be very interested in being able have access to those weapons for protection, and the protection of their students, in school. There might even be an incentive, perhaps with higher wages, for teachers who VOLUNTEER to assume this responsibility.

you can not be certain thast a young teacher will keep her thoughts together to pull out a gun which in most cases would be I hope in a locked box and use it on anybody.

I suppose you could say the same thing about a young police officer, and yet we depend on them for our security every day. I would assume, in both cases, that proper training would enable a teacher, as it would a police officer, to act in accord with that training.

how do you expect them to shoot a kid no matter what the situation.

At Columbine there were teachers and janitors who placed themselves in harms way to protect students.  And in Newtown it was reported that the principal was killed trying to lunge at the shooter.  There's also the instances where teachers hid their students in back rooms or behind classroom doors terrified that the shooter would come in and kill them all.  I don't think it would be a stretch to see any of those school workers pulling out guns, if they had them, to defend their students.

And what about you?  If another kid...and by "kid" I mean young adult...were about to shoot your children, would you hesitate shooting him to save them?  I certainly wouldn't...and I doubt that an appropriately trained teacher would no more hesitate than a police officer would.

I think the teachers should now how to keep their students safe in an even t of a situation.

Take your average school for example...how would you suggest teachers protect their students if they were confronted by another "Columbine"?  And why didn't the teachers in either Columbine or Newtown or Virginia Tech take these simple measure to protect their students?

I think it should be harder to get guns esp the ones used in the Sandy Brook.

CT has some of the strictest gun laws in the country...and none of the guns used in the shooting were banned...and what would have prevented the shooter from simply carrying more perfectly legal 9-shot clips and simply taking the extra 2-3 seconds to reload more often?

But really where would I have that teacher put their gun I dont want them to wear that thing when teaching my kids.

If it's holstered properly on the teacher's person, why would that be a danger to your children?  And would it resolve the issue for you if the gun were kept in a gunsafe, locked in the teacher's desk?

Esp at the elementary level. What if that teacher happens to be the one who goes off?

That doesn't sound like a very practical concern.  Do you have the same fears that it might be a police officer who happens to be the one who goes off?  Should we disarm our police officers because of that possibility?  I presume that a psychological screening, required for a teacher to carry a gun, would make that possibility practically nil...but if it is a serious concern for you, what would prevent an unhinged teacher, with no approval from the school, from simply bringing in a gun and doing the unthinkable?


I don't want  that teacher who teaches special ed to wear a gun because what if she gets that major disapline kid who over powers her and uses it. Or the High school teacher where half the kids are bigger than she is or even him?

Are there a lot of cases where teachers are being overpowered by their students?  And even though some students might be physically larger than a particular teacher, I can't see much motivation to use that disparity to gain control of a holstered gun.  But again, if almost impossible extremes are a concern for you, a gunsafe seems a reasonable solution.


Whaty if the teacher or security guard makes a mistake ? Sonmeone who looks suspiious do the take a chance and shoot? And what if they are wrong? What if in a case of the nerves that person misses an hits an innocent?

You could raise the same concern about police officers.  But again, it seems that proper training would be the fall back.  I can speak from some small experience in my relatively rare interactions with the police...but in no cases did the officer feel the need to draw his weapon.  I can't see why a security guard, or a teacher, would immediately confront a "suspicious" person, simply walking around the school, with their gun drawn let alone shoot someone unless there were confronted with a life-and-death situation.


Tragidey happend in places where any body could have been carrying a gun such as in the movie theater of even the military school.

I'm not sure what military school you're referring to, but it appears that the movie theater was specifically chosen because it was a gun-free zone.  There were many other theaters, both closer and larger than the one the "Joker" chose...but they were all gun-carry sites.  The same is true of all recent mass-shootings...all, except the assault on Gabriel Gifford's press stop, were gun-free zones...even the Ft Hood military base.  Coincidence?  I think not.  I believe that people intent on creating mayhem specifically select places where they can rack up the highest number of casualties.  And in almost all cases, there were significant opportunities to prevent or limit the carnage if "good people" were allowed to bear arms.

As I said before, where people are free to carry weapons, the instances of crime goes DOWN substantially.  Coincidence?  Nope.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Thu, 01-03-2013 - 10:08pm

I don't think a teacher s/b trained to use a gun anymore than an officer s/b trained to teach in a classroom...

Some officers are trained to teach, or simply teach based on their experience...but othe than that, your comparison simply makes no sense. Being trained to handle a firearm is a skill, not an occupation, and one that could easily be learned, even by a teacher.

And you can't prove that what happened in Columbine (and Newtown, too) wouldn't have happened if teachers were trained to use guns!

Of course you could.  In Columbine the the shooters progressed slowly through the school over an extended period, taking their time to wander through classrooms, library, cafeteria, etc killing as they went and reloading many times. At any time they could have been confronted by a "good guy with a gun" and saved the lives that would have been lost had the "good guy" not intervened.

And in Newtown...the shooter had the time to shoot several people in the front office...perhaps if one had been carrying a weapon, or had access, the shooting might have stopped there.  Or when the shooter entered the classroom...how long did it take to actually kill the teachers and 23 children?  I heard that he actually took time to reload.  What if the teacher or the aid had access to a gun?  What if the teacher in the next room had a weapon?  Could some, or all, of those children been saved?

You're right, denying teachers the right to a weapon proved much more successful...they all died.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-12-2011
Thu, 01-03-2013 - 10:58am

I agree with Jam.. I really don't think a teacher shoul bear the reponsiblity of knowing how to be a trained " gun handleer" Based a  a case of what ifs. Unfortunaetly what has happened im Columbine and most recently Sandy Brook are tragic but you can not be certain thast a young teacher will keep her thoughts together to pull out a gun which in most cases would be I hope in a locked box and use it on anybody. I can not see a most of the teachers I have met who would think to over power that High Schol student determined to do damage like in Colombine =, how do you expect them to shoot a kid no matter what the situation. I think the teachers should now how to keep their students safe in an even t of a situation. I think it should be harder to get guns esp the ones used in the Sandy Brook.

But really where would I have that teacher put their gun I dont want them to wear that thing when teaching my kids. Esp at the elementary level. What if that teacher happens to be the one who goes off? I don't want  that teacher who teaches special ed to wear a gun because what if she gets that major disapline kid who over powers her and uses it. Or the High school teacher where half the kids are bigger than she is or even him?

Whaty if the teacher or security guard makes a mistake ? Sonmeone who looks suspiious do the take a chance and shoot? And what if they are wrong? What if in a case of the nerves that person misses an hits an innocent?

Tragidey happend in places where any body could have been carrying a gun such as in the movie theater of even the military school .

Life sucks right now but adding more guns can only  lead to more tragedy

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-12-2011
Thu, 01-03-2013 - 10:58am

I agree with Jam.. I really don't think a teacher shoul bear the reponsiblity of knowing how to be a trained " gun handleer" Based a  a case of what ifs. Unfortunaetly what has happened im Columbine and most recently Sandy Brook are tragic but you can not be certain thast a young teacher will keep her thoughts together to pull out a gun which in most cases would be I hope in a locked box and use it on anybody. I can not see a most of the teachers I have met who would think to over power that High Schol student determined to do damage like in Colombine =, how do you expect them to shoot a kid no matter what the situation. I think the teachers should now how to keep their students safe in an even t of a situation. I think it should be harder to get guns esp the ones used in the Sandy Brook.

But really where would I have that teacher put their gun I dont want them to wear that thing when teaching my kids. Esp at the elementary level. What if that teacher happens to be the one who goes off? I don't want  that teacher who teaches special ed to wear a gun because what if she gets that major disapline kid who over powers her and uses it. Or the High school teacher where half the kids are bigger than she is or even him?

Whaty if the teacher or security guard makes a mistake ? Sonmeone who looks suspiious do the take a chance and shoot? And what if they are wrong? What if in a case of the nerves that person misses an hits an innocent?

Tragidey happend in places where any body could have been carrying a gun such as in the movie theater of even the military school .

Life sucks right now but adding more guns can only  lead to more tragedy

 

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Thu, 01-03-2013 - 8:17am
I don't think a teacher s/b trained to use a gun anymore than an officer s/b trained to teach in a classroom... And you can't prove that what happened in Columbine (and Newtown, too) wouldn't have happened if teachers were trained to use guns!

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Wed, 01-02-2013 - 11:11pm

What's the difference between a police officer trained to use a firearm and a teacher trained to use a firearm?  And what's the benefit of a police officer with a gun if that police officer only arrives AFTER the killing has taken place?

And statistically, the places with the most stringent gun laws are also the places with the highest crime rates.  What's a no brainer, is that if there were teachers in that elementary school, or Columbine, trained to use a gun and trained in tactics, there would be a lot more innocent kids alive today.

Pages