[wmbwinn]

Chumdawg:
"I don't see this as that big a deal. After all, couldn't the city simply make a number of the teachers into actual police officers if they so chose? Then they wouldn't even have to conceal the weapons. I'm sure the great majority of large-size schools in this state already have armed police officers on campus as it is."

Jefelump:
"We had an armed police officer at my jr high, back in 1988. That was 20 years ago."

------------------------------

I agree with the two sentiments above. I actually love Chumdawg's idea of deputizing a teacher or two to officially make them police officers or security guards; that idea thereby avoids the whole debate...

put the deputized teacher(s) through appropriate training and be done with it.

Kudos on at least two people thinking this through in the simplest of terms.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Underdog:
"which means proper handgun EDUCATION -- not more guns, or bans -- is probably the best solution to the problem..."

Give the deputized teachers "education" in training. Simple enough.

As to "education" for parents and children regarding the guns they have at home...

That is also a great idea. Switzerland puts every man through military training, has that man take his gun home with him, has that man come back every few years to re-demonstrate that that man has taken care of his gun and can still use it well, etc. Perfect training makes for a well behaved low crime country. See... more gun education about how to properly own and use a gun results in LESS crime...

I like Underdog's ideas. We need more gun education. But... we need the guns to be able to Learn how to use them and care for them....

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Chumdawg doing his best Obama/McCain flip flop:
"As I hinted at earlier, I don't see anything demonstrably wrong with, say, a uniformed police officer teaching a class. In fact, that uniform and badge and pistol on the hip do convey, shall we say, a sense of authority that perhaps is missing in certain school situations.

I'll admit, though, that it is somewhat odd to imagine a math teacher working problems on the board with a shoulder holster over his dress shirt. It's probably too close for comfort to the image of a military state.

Aw, hell, the more I think about this and try to consider both sides of the issue, the more ridiculous it seems. On second thought I don't think we want teachers bearing the responsibility of keeping the peace during a murderous rampage that in all likelihood is never going to break out. Those teachers have a job to do that is already tough enough as it is.

And we should probably remember that the Columbine kids intended to do the bulk of their damage with explosives, if I'm not mistaken. Handguns are no defense against explosives. And if the bad guys know that they won't have the only guns in a gunfight, that makes them more predisposed to use explosives.

Maybe shit just happens sometimes, down to human nature, and despite our best interests we might not be able to do anything about it. I mean, compare Columbine and the DISD. Which is more likely to see a gun crime? Put another way: if your job was to take measures to prevent gun crime on every campus in America, where do you start and finish? Where does the DISD rank, compared to Columbine or the podunk Texas school that has authorized its teachers to carry guns? And how many gun crimes of this sort has the DISD experienced, with none of this sort of defense?

Maybe this is using a crane to swat a fly. Maybe we ought to spend more time believing that people are basically good when it comes down to it, rather than obsessing over our potential evil sides and creating these weird, uncomfortable environments for everybody because we are worried about that one nut case who, like Godot, will likely never come.

Now that I think about it, it's probably a good thing that none of my teachers were packing heat. They may not have shot me, but I can't guarantee you I wouldn't have been pistol-whipped a time or two."

I still like the idea of the deputized, trained school teacher sheriff. The teacher is trained. The gun stays on the teacher's person either concealed or fully exposed. A trained law enforcement officer is going to behave appropriately. So, there is nothing bad about this...

The whole idea of having armed law enforcement and "concealed carry" laws is for the rare need to be armed...

Even in a crime infested area like Dallas or Chicago, most police officers never shoot anyone. That doesn't mean the law enforcement officer shouldn't carry a pistol.

Frequency of crime is not really the debate...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Chumdawg:
"I would probably think twice about sending my kid into a potential war zone. I might worry about the message it sends to him. I might even thinking about moving to a small town, away from the urban crime blight, where a kid is free to do so much as attend school without the fear that a gunfight could break out at any time, and is likely enough to do so that the teachers are compelled to carry guns.

Except...I'm already in a small town. What the hell? What is this nation coming to, that even in a small town you might be a sitting duck just sitting in your classroom?"

I agree with you Chum. I won't send my kid to a place where he/she is likely to need protection...

In this same post, you later said that maybe the child should be armed instead of the teacher. I do have a big problem with that idea...

Children fight all the time with each other. They don't need a gun with them...

I like your original idea. Deputize a teacher or two and put that new Sheriff teacher through proper training. Training and education (Underdog) are the issue.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Underdog:
"What if the teacher snaps and starts shooting-up the classroom?


(since we're already acting under the notion that anything can happen at any time...)"

This is why the teacher needs to be deputized and trained. Properly trained persons are unlikely to "snap". The training is designed to remove persons who appear to have any problems that might pre dispose them to "snap". Even the military sends people home when the training demonstrates a problem psychologically that might pre dispose a "snap".

Jefelump:
"Quote:
In order for teachers and staff to carry a pistol, they must have a Texas license to carry a concealed handgun; must be authorized to carry by the district; must receive training in crisis management and hostile situations and have to use ammunition that is designed to minimize the risk of ricochet in school halls.


So if I'm the head of the school district and I'm looking at a candidate for conceal/carry in one of my schools, you can bet your ass I'm going to want a full psych eval done on him/her. If there's any hint at all of a teacher having problems maintaining order in their classroom, or being just a little unstable, then application to carry in my school district is denied."

Bingo, Underdog...


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Underdog:
"To name a few:


Video of teacher attacking students...

Teacher attacks student in North Carolina...

Teacher attacks first-graders with broom...

Student hit by teacher in Indiana...

Queens teacher punches 12-year-old in face...

Teacher's aide attacks autistic student..."

Again, the idea is to deputize and train persons who are psychologically fit to be trained and who pass the requirements of law enforcement. The idea is not to just let any old crazy teacher carry a gun. We all had teachers that we wouldn't want armed at school...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Chum:
"Yes, I'm sure your 10-year-old is probably already better at using a gun than even your average high school teacher. That's not what gives me reason for pause. What gives me reason for pause is that your average high school teacher used to be able to get through his entire life without ever even handling a gun.

Other than that, I'm not sure what I find more disconcerting, the notion that your prebuscent child is already skilled at wielding a firearm or the notion that you are proud of it.

Seriously, ten years old? What, do you live in the boondocks or something, and you're going to need him to hunt down family food in a couple years? Who teaches a baby to fire a gun?"

I teach my child to use a gun safely and appropriately. My father started teaching me when I was three years old. That was when I started going hunting with him every year. I was eleven before I carried my own gun. I was 13 when I was allowed to carry that gun and hunt somewhere else than next to my father. Point is simple. I was trained. I was fully trained in safety. I can't tell you how many times I got kicked in the arse literally and figuratively for making even a small mistake in gun safety.

Underdog is correct when he says that training is all important. Education must be in place to safely and correctly use a gun.

The sooner you start teaching a child, the better.

Jefelump:
"You said yourself earlier that the kids of NRA members aren't the problem. See, those kids are taught how to use and respect firearms.

And if it were such a bad thing for kids to handle guns, then why do the Cub Scouts have a BB Shooting beltloop?

What gives me pause are those highschool kids who manage to get their hands on guns, who have never shot in their lives and don't have any respect for the weapon. Those kids play video games and think it's cool to shoot. They learn what happens AFTER the fatal shooting."

Dead on, Jefelump. Dead on...


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Mary then started expressing great doubt that school teachers were qualified to carry guns.

I agree, Mary. They should deputize a few that are qualified and fit. They should be properly trained.

"By the way, what ever happened to good old fashioned "specialization and the division of labor"?"

I agree, Mary. They should be properly specialized.
My crazy old second grade math teacher that hit us all the time with a bicycle flag pole (long orange flexible stick/flag pole) should never be allowed to carry a gun in the classroom...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jefelump:
"Only those who follow certain requirements and are approved by the authorities can carry a concealed handgun."

Again, we are talking about pursuing a logical approach where the deputized Sheriff teacher is properly trained and licensed...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If I remember correctly from other threads in other places, Mary is looking at a career as a school teacher. Relax, Mary. The idea is not to expect you to pack a gun to school. The idea is that there may be a teacher or two on various campuses that might be appropriately trained as a Sheriff in addition to a school teacher. Might even be a way to see a teacher get paid what they are worth...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jthig32:"Guns have no business in a class room unless they're on the hip of a member of law enforement. If you're worried about enforcement at your school, get a couple off duty police officers to eat some donuts in the teacher's lounge for a while."

Welcome to the full thread topic and discussion, Jthig. Your idea is what we are talking about. Use trained law enforcement. What's wrong with a teacher getting that training?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Mary:
"How about answering my first question?

Through what manner or mechanism is this "trust" being established between the principal and the soon-to-be-gun-weilding-teacher?

Do you have any thoughtful solutions, or just more empty hyperbole to offer?"

Honestly, Mary, I thought the question had been answered. The teacher who is going to carry a weapon has been thoroughly trained and deputized (or at least "cleared" by Concealed Carry Rules and other training appropriate to the school teacher; I prefer a full deputization and full training). It is not an issue of the principal deciding who is going to pack a gun in school.