Arkansas School to arm teachers

Phoenix23 said:
I'm right there with ya... 110%

Bringing guns into a school where there are supposed to be NO guns... poor decision. Lock the doors to the school, and the classrooms and follow school procedure and there would be no need for this….
Click to expand...
Locked doors (unless they're bullet proof armory style) won't stop bullets.
 
jonnyghost said:
I see where you are coming from and it would be a tragedy if a child got killed by a stray bullet. But I also wonder, if a legally armed person had been at Newtown and stopped the shooter before he killed anyone BUT one of the legally armed persons rounds killed someone would they be a hero or a child killer?

In reality we have no way of knowing how many lives if any they saved because we wouldn't know for sure if anyone would be killed by the shooter but in my scenario we know that the shooter is about to kill 20 people.
Click to expand...

I prefer to have no one killed - require extensive training. That what police officer can do it.

Newtown case is more complicated and it was worst school shooting. The outcome could be worse if teacher try to take perpetrator down that where many children are in class. They will end up hit children. It is best for police officers to deal because they know about massacre and can take appropriate action.

You cannot expect about outcome by stopping the school shooting because it is varies by cases to cases. Newtown case was one of worst. If teacher hit the children by stray bullet or accidental, will resign the job and have deal with serious emotion distress. The parents can sue the school in expensive lawsuits.
 
Reba said:
By the time you have school age children what if your local schools all have armed teachers?

Shooters can break in thru locked doors.
Click to expand...

I will take my child to different school that don't have armed teachers.

For me, I want to raise my child in California so arm the teachers are extremely unlikely.

Like I said above, put armed police officers to patrol the school.
 
Foxrac said:
I prefer to have no one killed -
Click to expand...
I think we all would but it's not a perfect world.

Foxrac said:
require extensive training. That what police officer can do it.
Click to expand...
Police shoot bystanders too.

Foxrac said:
Newtown case is more complicated and it was worst school shooting. The outcome could be worse if teacher try to take perpetrator down that where many children are in class. They will end up hit children. It is best for police officers to deal because they know about massacre and can take appropriate action.
Click to expand...
My point though was that they probably wouldn't accidentally shoot 20 kids but the shooter did. In my scenario 1 person died (other than the shooter). It's possible that no one would die if there had been an armed response.

Foxrac said:
You cannot expect about outcome by stopping the school shooting because it is varies by cases to cases. Newtown case was one of worst. If teacher hit the children by stray bullet or accidental, will resign the job and have deal with serious emotion distress. The parents can sue the school in expensive lawsuits.
Click to expand...

This is probably true. If you shoot a gun you are responsible for the bullets that come out of it. How that would work out in trail would depend on the details. So is the 1 person dead by the armed civilian worse than the 20 dead by the shooter? They are both bad I agree but I'd have to choose the fewer deaths.
 
Foxrac said:
I will take my child to different school that don't have armed teachers.

For me, I want to raise my child in California so arm the teachers are extremely unlikely.

Like I said above, put armed police officers to patrol the school.
Click to expand...

Interesting note. California is one of the few states that exempt licensed CCW holders from the California Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995. I know it seems odd from that state but if you have a license you can carry at public schools.

"exemption, located in PC 626.9(l), for Peace Officers, retired Peace Officers, and licensed CCW holders"
 
jonnyghost said:
I think we all would but it's not a perfect world.

Police shoot bystanders too.

My point though was that they probably wouldn't accidentally shoot 20 kids but the shooter did. In my scenario 1 person died (other than the shooter). It's possible that no one would die if there had been an armed response.

This is probably true. If you shoot a gun you are responsible for the bullets that come out of it. How that would work out in trail would depend on the details. So is the 1 person dead by the armed civilian worse than the 20 dead by the shooter? They are both bad I agree but I'd have to choose the fewer deaths.
Click to expand...

In bold, yes, they did but every police department have different training requirement. The police officer (or worse, rookie) with little training, could kill the bystanders.

Well, I don't trust armed teachers and school staffs.
 
Lau2046 said:
Now they need to start a new policy that vistors will have to be escorted on school grounds at all time and must state why they're there, who they came to see and for what reason. Treating everyone like they're in a federal building is yet another way to deter this. Anyone seen wandering on school grounds and can't be readily identifed as an active student of the school, the police should be called and the school should be placed on lock down as a prevention. I think it's a great idea. I've always felt that the best way to fight crime is to shoot back.....

Laura
Click to expand...

I am right there with you. The posters claiming they would not send their child to a school with armed teachers ....don't have children.

The reason these mass shootings result in such a high number of casualties is because no one is armed to fight back. I would rather have a gun than hide in a closet unarmed.
 
jonnyghost said:
Is it worth trading safety for lower insurance premiums?
Click to expand...

May not, what happen if school have no insurance coverage because all insurance companies refuse to cover or offer at extremely expensive rate?

It will cost taxpayers more and they have to jack the property tax to fund.
 
Phoenix23 said:
Arkansas... Georgia... Dakota... Tennessee... Texas... Missouri... Oklahoma... Need I go on? All those states are considered "southern states" and "southern" meaning the majority of how their state is run... It doesn't surprise me...

Don't get me wrong, I'm all with the "right to bear arms" thing. However, I'm simply pointing it out... there will be a lawsuit... it WILL happen... and it WILL be stupid...

Also guns all through a school... I wouldn't send my kid there... Hell no.

If a woman can sue McDonalds for spilling her coffee on her lap and scolding herself because it wasn't clearly marked "hot" anything is possible for a lawsuit... We've all seen it, and it won't be the last time... This thing, will be no different.
Click to expand...

And Massachusetts is a Northern State. They also currently hold the record for the highest number of elementary school aged children killed in a mass shooting.
 
 
Foxrac said:
May not, what happen if school have no insurance coverage because all insurance companies refuse to cover or offer at extremely expensive rate?

It will cost taxpayers more and they have to jack the property tax to fund.
Click to expand...

CNN interviewed one of the firearms instructors. He said the teachers received SWAT training, and by arming teachers, the school system is saving money rather than hiring resource officers.
 
Foxrac said:
I will take my child to different school that don't have armed teachers.

For me, I want to raise my child in California so arm the teachers are extremely unlikely.

Like I said above, put armed police officers to patrol the school.
Click to expand...
Since they can carry guns in California schools already, and they are concealed, your children may be in schools with guns without knowing it.
 
Foxrac said:
May not, what happen if school have no insurance coverage because all insurance companies refuse to cover or offer at extremely expensive rate?

It will cost taxpayers more and they have to jack the property tax to fund.
Click to expand...

Or outlaw lawsuits against the school unless they are found negligent or otherwise criminal. Same thing they do with police.
 
jonnyghost said:
Interesting note. California is one of the few states that exempt licensed CCW holders from the California Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995. I know it seems odd from that state but if you have a license you can carry at public schools.

"exemption, located in PC 626.9(l), for Peace Officers, retired Peace Officers, and licensed CCW holders"
Click to expand...

Having armed teachers are rare in Californian schools.
 
Reba said:
Since they can carry guns in California schools already, and they are concealed, your children may be in schools with guns without knowing it.
Click to expand...

That's rare, also it wasn't in city school that where I grew up.

I could ask principal if their school have armed teachers or not.
 
Back
Top