Controversy as 200 Utah teachers to be given concealed weapons training in wake of Sandy Hook

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
Oh sure, this idea is fantastic until some strung out teacher who's had enough of the constant abuse from the children goes berserk in the classroom one day, probably with the gun he was suppose to use to protect the kids

Let me get this straight...

You trust these teachers with your kids, 8 hours per day, 5 days a week, for 3-5 years, UNARMED.

Throw a gun in the mix and suddenly the teachers have turned into Charles Manson and you can't turn your back on them.

Got it.

reply to post by WhereIsTheBatman


I don't know who thought that by keeping people from learning how to defend themselves taht would make them safe... it makes them more of a target.

If they know who to defend themselves.. they stop being an easy target.

we have tried being unarmed.. lets see how armed works out

Originally posted by Teye22
reply to post by nixie_nox

 

Exactly, that is what happened at my kid's school, one teacher stood in front of the gunman and said that she will not let him hurt "her kids". That was bravery (and a little stupid cause she could have been killed, although for a great cause) and was enough to hold him back and keep him outside the classrooms until the police arrived. She saved a lot of lives that day.

Whats his name shot how many adults that tired to stand up to him. 6?7?

Do you have any kids in school? I do. I want Miss Jones to come up from under the desk with an Ithica Deerslayer barking and blow wackos head all over the wall behind him. Then lift up her skirt and p#ss all over him. And then stand over the mess and say schools out sucker.

Any school teachers posting in this thread by the way?

In Mississippi as long as you are not a student of the school you can carry concealed with the enhanced permit. So I pitty the idiot that would attempt a school shooting here. Most of the teachers were packin when I was in HS ... But then again I hag a gun rack with loaded guns parked in the parking lot when I was a student.

Armed teachers hey?
Well at least the killers wont have to buy one then...just clonk a teacher and blaze away....not good having weaponised schools...better to lock the schoolyard down maybe after the bell rings in the morning...

Originally posted by boymonkey74
How long until an overworked Teacher loses it and shoots his/her class?
Or how long until a student gets hold of the firearm and uses it?
Madness complete madness.

How long until that overworked teacher loses it and goes home and gets their guns then goes back to school and starts shooting? HMMMmmm none by my searching.

Your point is lost in the fact that if they did go crazy there is nothing to suggest that they couldn't just bring their guns from home into that "holy" Gun Free Zone. The difference once again is if one did pull such a stunt there would still be other teachers there to stop them with something more than just throwing their bodies in front of the gun.

Originally posted by stirling
Armed teachers hey?
Well at least the killers wont have to buy one then...just clonk a teacher and blaze away....not good having weaponised schools...better to lock the schoolyard down maybe after the bell rings in the morning...

This is a reduculous statment...

So you are saying that having guns in schools will increase the chance of murders there, because now the crazy bad guy doesn't need to bring guns into the school since all he needs to do is go after those that are armed?

Is he going to get all the guns then? Round them all up? I guess this is a much better option than just to bring their own guns.

Or just maybe he decides that the school would not be the best place to kill since he would not be walking into a gun free zone with his guns anymore.

Originally posted by MysterX

Originally posted by Teye22
Yeah Great Idea!!!!

So next time there is a shooting, it will not be one way....it will now be a gun fight....lets just wait and see at the next shooting (I truely hope there are none of course). There will be kids cought in the cross fire and as many will be hit by teachers as the mad gunman...I think it is the worst Idea ever.......

PUT METAL DETECTORS AT EVERY SINGLE ENTRANCE WITH AN ARMED SECURITY GUARD!!!! this would work a lot beter I think.

The problem I think is not to shot the person walking in the school with a gun...Its keeping him outside the school in the first place.

Good.

A running gunfight means opposition to a lunatic trying to kill people.

A sauntering, unopposed slaughter...is just that.

A gunfight is extremely unlikely, but is infinitely preferable to a lunatic sauntering around picking off people one by one, don't you think?

A gunfight will delay a killer, if they desire to survive long enough to kill of course.

The delay will allow time for police to arrive and handle the situation.

No gunfight, means the exact opposite.

Actual case in point. The recent sniper ambush of the brave firefighters responding to a house fire in upstate New York.

[the shooter] set a car on fire and touched off an inferno in his Webster home on a strip of land along the Lake Ontario shore, took up a sniper's position and opened fire on the first firefighters to arrive at about 5:30 a.m. on Christmas Eve, authorities said. He wounded two other firefighters and an off-duty police officer who was on his way to work. A Webster police officer who had accompanied the firefighters shot back at Spengler with a rifle in a brief exchange of gunfire before the gunman killed himself.

It was only after exchanging gunfire with the police officer that the shooter turned his weapon on himself and ended the conflict. Had the exchange not occurred, how many firefighters or other bystanders would have paid the ultimate price. Included with the casualties was an off-duty officer that was on his way to work.

So.....a man that was a previously convicted felon (found guilty of murdering his grandmother) and server 17 years for this act, is found suitable to be released into the general populace. Being a convicted felon, he is prevented, by law, from legally owning a firearm.

1) Man allegedly flips out and uses an illegal firearm (felony weapons count 1)
2) Man allegedly kills his sister (possible murder count 1)
3) Man allegedly sets his car ablaze (possible arson count 1)
4) Man allegedly sets his house ablaze (possible arson count 2)
5) Man allegedly fires upon and kills firefighters (possible murder count 2)
6) Man allegedly fires upon off duty police officer (possible attempted murder count 1)
7) Arson count 1 results in numerous house fires in the neighboring dwellings (possible arson counts 3, 4, 5. ....)
8) Situation is stopped and further lives saved by a trained man with a gun, returning fire only upon the original shooter with no collateral damage of innocents killed.

Law enforcement trace the firearm to the owner, who allegedly purchased it legally, yet it was actually an illegal phantom purchase for the convicted felon. Yet, it was tracked down, after the fact, and after the tragedy occurred.

New York woman arrested in connection with murder of 2 firefighters Read more: www.foxnews.com...

Can anyone tell me why the many broken (existing) laws here did not prevent this tragedy from happening? Bad people will do bad things, even breaking many laws in the process. How is this not obvious to some folks here, regardless of what "laws" are on the books to be charged with?

Given concealed weapons..... or given weapons to conceal?

reply to post by WhereIsTheBatman


I grew up in Utah..Sandy to be exact. The Mormons are really big into family and community and to be honest I loved ever minute of growing up the shadow of the Wasatch Mountains. People were good to each other and neighbor watched out for neighbor.



They do not have bars on every street and growing up we did not have to even take our bikes inside at night. It was a very safe place to raise a family all because of one thing the Mormon religion.




Heck I am not even Mormon and personally don't believe in it one bit but they sure do know how to build strong communities. I miss it often and if I could I would move back tomorrow.

Originally posted by caladonea
reply to post by WhereIsTheBatman

 

I think that teachers being legal and trained gun owners...to protect the children is a good idea in theory.

However I do have 2 concerns:

(1) There needs to be an in-depth background check on the teachers; to try and make sure that none of them is going to go crazy; and harm anyone. (How this can be done I am not sure).

(2) How the guns will be stored at the school for quick and easy access by the teachers; and that no one else will have access to them.

I believe in defense...when it is necessary.

1. No Brainer, and shoule be done anyways.

2. On their person. What good do guns in the principal's office do when the gunman is in your classroom laying waste?

Originally posted by lilmehere

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
Oh sure, this idea is fantastic until some strung out teacher who's had enough of the constant abuse from the children goes berserk in the classroom one day, probably with the gun he was suppose to use to protect the kids

Let me get this straight...

You trust these teachers with your kids, 8 hours per day, 5 days a week, for 3-5 years, UNARMED.

Throw a gun in the mix and suddenly the teachers have turned into Charles Manson and you can't turn your back on them.

Got it.

Nobody's saying that. You're deliberately oversimplifying the issue.

The vast majority of teachers, should they be armed, would never simply snap one day and start shooting kids. Most teachers are good, decent, responsible folks. But, as others have said, they're often overworked, overstressed, and under payed. I'm not saying that all teachers will shoot the kids in their care, but some very likely will. Eventually. Just like how not all teachers sexually abuse the children in their care, but some most definitely have. That's a verifiable fact. If a teacher is willing to take away a child's innocence, whose to say that if that teacher were suddenly packing heat, he or she wouldn't be willing to take away a child's life?

I'm speaking as somebody who, at the age of 7, was physically assaulted by a school teacher. I was shook and slapped and then shook some more for good measure by a belligerent old woman who had no place in a school in the first place. My crime? Crying in class, as a 7 year old, because the psychotic old biddy was screaming her lungs off at everybody. Guess she was having a bad day. I'll never forget the suddenness of her attack, and how helpless it made me feel. If that moron had had a gun, whos to say what might have transpired?

[EDIT: Didn't mean to write so much but please bear with me. I hope the following provides new perspective for discussion]

Theres a whole lot of WHAT IFS going around on this thread.

I think the thing most people fail to remember is that we don't live in a perfect world, nor do we live in a "safe" one. There are alot of idealistic responses going around.

However, we are surely and steadily losing a sense of personal accountability /responsibility. One that i think most gun owners have or are taught to gain, as it is not a toy, but indeed a weapon of death. I am not elevating gun owners to a pedestal here, but just as someone studies martial arts to reach black belt, or trains with a sword in ancient times, you learn to respect the power you wield and have personal accountability and responsibility as a result of personal experience, instructors and peers.

9/11 to me, is an example of this loss. A couple men on a plane with no guns, only razor blades were able to subdue the entire passenger and crew population aboard with no resistance? Were they waiting for God?, a sky marshall to save them? Why did no one fight back (as far as we know, and evidence would suggest, don't want to detract from the issue just making a point)

I don't see why this is controversial. No one is forcing teachers to carry guns, but they are allowing and encouraging them too. In most states CCW doesn't allow weapons on school grounds. They are asking for permission to bring that protection for themselves and their students i.e., personal accountability.

Ms. Rose may not want a snub 38 under her cardigan but she may feel alot better knowing mr richardson in the class next door who hunts often and occupies the range every other weekend probably has one on him.

No, there SHOULDN'T be a need for weapons in the classroom, however, it appears in reality.... there is.

As a society on the whole we need to bring back personal accountability for ourselves and others and stop relying exclusively on "highly trained" DEA agents and policeman who are 25 minutes out once somebody manages a phone call.

YOU CANNOT LEGISLATE MORALITY.
YOU CANNOT MAKE SOMETHING SIMPLY GO AWAY BY MAKING IT ILLEGAL.

As far as banning of guns in the US, its in the constitution, its what OUR country was founded on and irregardless of any argument PRO gun OR con, and once you make it ok to begin dismantling our constitution, the foot is in the door. Where does it end?

The human condition hasn't evolved into utopian universal love and acceptance. If it had, not only would there be no need for firearms, there would be no need to change the constitution either, they would simply fade from existence as no one had a desire to touch one.

THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T NEED TO BE CHANGED, PEOPLE DO.

EDIT: SORRY Didn't Realize How Long I Made This Post. Sorry, However I Hope Its Added A New Perspective To This Passionate Discussion

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
Oh sure, this idea is fantastic until some strung out teacher who's had enough of the constant abuse from the children goes berserk in the classroom one day, probably with the gun he was suppose to use to protect the kids

Oh I forgot, the Gun Free School Zone will prevent said teacher from bringing a gun anyway when they snap.

Funny you mention that. I was in OSUT when my brother got killed in a gun-free zone. They told me I could not come home because he was not blood related, of course I was supposed to be home anyways! This was 8 days after my daughters birth! I got a medical and now I am on welfare.

I guess JFK was right huh?
Funny thing is, had they let me come home, they would have retained me. Instead, they wasted money training me. Well, whatever, they didn't even let me get a cigarette after watching me get the worst news you can get.

If you ask me, those nut-to-but gay cav scout's that are NOT speaking up about this, and acting like I am wrong, can keep their short shorts and complete lack of humanity.

I love our soldiers but F*ck the Army. And F*ck any recruiter that doesn't warn about nut to butt and the way the army will break it's contract with you even if it is in paper. If you ask me, they owe me my welfare . If someone is thinking of joining a combat MOS that utilizes nut to but in training and you don't warn them... how can you call yourself a decent or honest man? That is spiritually disgusting and offensive to God. Naked in the shower line talking about nut to butt....


Why does our government create all the problems and then blame us any way they can? Oh yeah.... they don't care.

I love soldiers, EMT's, marines, sailors, airmen, doctors, and all others who spend their careers in service of others.

I can not freaking stand who they work for, and I am NOT talking about the government or the elite in this case.

No the ELITE and the GOVERNMENT are the ones to blame for the gun free zones AND my brothers death, who had he had a pistol would surely be ALIVE RIGHT NOW.

I will not fight for this government, or even try to again, until they give us our rights back. Also, until someone puts an end to nut-to-but. Also, the whole keeping the contract thing.

Fix all of that, and you have a 84 on the ASVAB with up close combat experience (in an underdog situation mind you, most would be dead if they were put in that situation) in the civilian world ready to sign up for a combat MOS again. Love my country, greatest country in the world. Still a lot to fix though.


I am still waiting on the government to realize what an asset I could be for them. You would think they would have noticed by now.... oh well no sweat off my back.

Maybe one day we will eliminate gun free zones. More people like my brother will have hot lead in their brain matter before that happens.

I love this idea, teach them not only conceal and carry but close quarters
combat and hostage protection tactics, i want our teachers so darn mean
and prepared that a swat team would sweat beads at the thought of
going up against them.....

that's how you protect kids, you use practical means that actually accomplish
the goal set forth, not make laws that criminals ignore anyway.

So um.... what happens when a teacher snaps and slaughters his entire class? Seems to me this opens up a whole can of worms...

Teachers can snap on students too, and if they got a gun on hand rather than a piece of chalk, it might not turn out too well. Or not. Painting this as either one thing or the other is kinda misleading.

To answer the question of what happens when a teacher snaps and goes nuts,
how many teachers are in most schools? and typically class rooms are close
together so that another teacher could respond, that's what happens, what happens
when a mad man walks into an unarmed school and starts shooting? we
already know the answer to that...... we are talking 5-10 maybe dead vs
25+ killed.

Im sorry but in the real world where bad things happen whether
or not we want them to, being prepared to respond quickly is the only way
to be safe, not a non physical law that does absolutely nothing to actually
help, it simply says that's bad, lets not forget people, murder is already
illegal, do you really think that's not enough? the law flat out already says
what it needs to, the only other safe thing that can be done is
something that ACTUALLY grants a measure of protection and not
a bunch of words that have no meaning to people who have chosen
to kill.

I think it's a lot to assume *most* teachers would willingly carry a gun, let alone use one. I also think it's incredibly polarizing, and misleading, to suggest that guns in schools will indefinitely cause problems or that they are the best means of resolving the problem. Case and point: heavily armed countries like Switzerland don't have a problem with shootings in schools every few months, but countries with excessively tight gun control laws like Japan don't have a problem with shootings occurring in their society with any sort of regularity either (gun crime is low in both countries, although much moreso in Japan, and crime in general is also quite low in Japan). The fact of the matter is there are more factors at play here than just the guns themselves, such as a country's history and culture. When I consider USA's history and culture I find myself wanting to arm myself not because I think it's the best means of protecting myself, but because I really don't know what else to do in the face of such madness.

If this was implemented in every school across the US, there could be so many scenarios that could go horribly wrong.

It boggles my mind. But, hey... Each to their own.