lovmuffin
Posts: 3759
Joined: 9/28/2007
Status: offline
|
I don't mind reading your sarcasm or offensive remarks when you're directing them at some one else, but I appreciate the civility. I'll do the same. You bring up some points that absolutely should be considered by a school district should they contemplate allowing teachers to pack heat but I think much of your assessment is exaggerated. I'll try to address most of your points.
First off I'll say, when I asked "what equipment are you talking about ?" I thought of body armor after I posted it.....Duh.....
quote:
ORIGINAL: EdBowie
Anyone who does not grasp the benefit of communications, equipment, and tactical training in a fire fight, much less an active shooter in a school, is coming to their opinions with out enough facts to reach a logical conclusion.
We're not talking about the military. I mean even a cop on the beat might have to pull his weapon and respond to a threat within a moments notice. Maybe that cop will have the luxury of a few seconds to call for backup, so yes, the radio might come in handy but if lives are at stake he needs to respond quickly. I guess my question still stands. Aside from body armor, what equipment does he need in a fire fight ? He's going to have pepper spray, a taser or stun gun, a flashlight, a knife and some spare ammo. Aside from his speed break holster, none of those things are going to factor in if he has to rapidly deploy his weapon against a perpetrator with a gun. It's pretty much going to be the same the same with an armed teacher. If the teacher hears an idiot shooting the place up, he goes towards the gunshots using the tactics he learned in training and tries to get a shot at the idiot. There's going to be plenty of people calling for backup on the phone. Not only that but the teacher will likely have the element of surprise in his favor.
quote:
ORIGINAL:
The training in a concealed carry permit class is based around a few selected scenarios such as a home burglary or a face to face robbery. The bulk of the classroom time is spent on the laws about self defense.
I get that, and if a school district wants to allow armed teachers, advanced training could be a requirement for those who carry. The training should be specifically oriented to active shooter school building types of scenarios and marksmanship. Not only that but handgun and ammo selection should be specific. Heaviest weight .44, .45 and .38 +P caliber hollow points come to mind so as not to over penetrate.
quote:
ORIGINAL:
the armed employees notion is as full of holes as saying 'Why not give every employee a full medical kit and not waste time or money on calling an ambulance They can take a first aid class, and learn how to do emergency trachs, etc.
I'm going to have to say that's not a fair comparison. If a student gets his leg gashed open, someone will probably give first aid to stop the bleeding until the ambulance gets there. If an active shooter starts his shit, an armed teacher can at least try to stop or minimize the bloodbath until the police arrive.
quote:
ORIGINAL:
Here's what would happen in real life. Any school of any size is going to have at least a dozen or more people in it at any given moment, who are unknown to most of the staff. New hires, substitute teachers, transfers... all eligible to be armed.
So shots ring out, kids start screaming, the coach is yelling 'Everybody run to the gym let's go, NOW!!!... someone else is yelling 'Stay in your rooms!! Under your desks!!".
20 or 30 employees run out the door of their classrooms and offices waving guns... they see the new employee, also waving a gun, so they open fire. The vice-principal comes around corner, and sees someone shooting the new teacher to whom she was just introduced, so she shoots them. Then the cafeteria doors fly open and a kid soaked in blood runs toward the teachers waving a gun that the shooter dropped....
Do I need to go on? It is setting the stage for the worst outcome possible, and that's just in the first few seconds.
These aren't fantasies, these are rational risk assessments. Sorry, no, it isn't just a bad idea, it is utterly unworkable.
I'm going to go with fantasy on some of that. First off, so what if a school employee is eligible for a permit. That shouldn't mean they're necessarily eligible to pack heat in the school. I agree that 30 armed teachers running around with guns could take the pandemonium to a higher level. I would guess that 10 or 12, maybe a few more, I'm not sure exactly, would be the limit for a large high school and 3 or 4 in a grade school. Why can't the principles and higher ups carefully select candidates based on let's say those who have permits and meet other criteria that might make some one more or less eligible such as military service or experience with firearms. I just think your whole scenario, some of which is worthy of consideration for training purposes, is highly exaggerated.
quote:
ORIGINAL:
In order to eliminate these problems, everyone armed in the school would have to be in direct communication with a trained central coordinator who had some reliable means of knowing what was going on. The armed employees would have to have tactical training to a high degree, and they would need vests, etc. Having a gun does not make anyone bulletproof.
On a practical level, the cost of training and equipping all those who wanted it would be astronomical... and then multiply that figure by every school in the country.
I don't see why you need that type of communication and a central coordinator. You're making it more difficult than it needs to be. I'll tell you what's going on, an idiot is shooting people, go drop the SOB as fast as you can. Yes, tactical training is good, armed personnel should get it, continue it and practice regularly.
The cost ??? What would be the cost of hiring armed guards with benefits, pensions and all the rest of it which is also a good alternative. I can see some costs involved but I don't think astronomical. Most permit holders will have their own guns or want them. Why can't there be training classes that involve several or more teachers out of the whole district or at least several schools as apposed to one on one instruction ? It's less expensive and it works for police agencies.
quote:
ORIGINAL:
And let's not forget liability issues. If the teachers weren't trained to at least SWAT level, then the schools would be held negligent for everything that didn't go well.
And, who is going to pay for workman's comp from any gun mishaps?
There certainly are those issues but I think SWAT level is exaggerated. They're the same type of liability issues a city or county has with its law enforcement and some of these cops suck with their side arms.
quote:
ORIGINAL:
And to repeat, where are teachers going to find time to do all this training and stay in practice? 3AM?
Why 3AM ? What's wrong with nights and weekends or 2 months in the summer ? I worked full time and practiced every weekend at one point in my life.
quote:
ORIGINAL:
.......opinions with out enough facts to reach a logical conclusion.
It's not nearly as difficult as you're making it out to be.
I'm going to go along with what this world renowned expert has to say.
http://www.personaldefensesolutions.net/massadsurvey.htm
_____________________________
"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Unknown
"Long hair, short hair—what's the difference once the head's blowed off." - Farmer Yassir
|
RE: Anotther school shooting. - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread