Florida teachers can arm themselves under new gun bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Florida Guardian program isn't intended to allow any teacher to simply start carrying her little .25ACP or .38 snub in her purse. A lot of the 144 hours of training that will be required of anyone becoming an armed staff member is on safe selection, carry, and retention.

And if that training is being conducted by the local law enforcement branch, I wonder how much of it is close to academy training. Last I checked, which was decades ago, the academy for reserve officer in Florida was 800 hours. If this is a quality training program, you're already 1/4 of the way there.
 
EDIT: My point is that the lack of firearms within prisons doesn't necessarily equate to "community safety".

Schools and prisons differ in that the flow of people in and out of one is far greater than of the other, and I just can't see any practical way to make them more similar in how that takes place. I agree that hardening points of entry/egress is a first and important step, one that has already been addressed in many areas.

School districts are loathe to spend any money whatsoever on security. They'd much rather spend it buying the latest fad in curriculum or social-emotional learning program that they will dump 2-3 years down the road in favor of some other latest and greatest fad.
 
D.B. Cooper writes:

They'd much rather spend it buying the latest fad in curriculum or social-emotional learning program that they will dump 2-3 years down the road in favor of some other latest and greatest fad.

Ain't that the truth. Married to a classroom teacher, and having worked in the school system myself for a bit, I see it all the time.

Regarding academy training, my entire academy course, back in 1987, was maybe 1200 hours. I think eighty of them were on the range, so the 144 hours might be the firearms-portion of the current CJSTC standard. The simple CWFL-sufficient class means nothing.
I know that the Texas law requires school marshals (as they're called there) does require that armed staff members also complete the same standards of firearms training as is required of LEOs.
 
None of the teachers i know would pack in the classroom regardless of the training.

I only know 2-3 who would, and all of them are prior service. I'm not even sure I would carry. By contrast however, 99% of my colleagues would not, and some have said that they would outright refuse to work in a school where guns were allowed.

That said, I was ust at the range a couple hours ago where someone asked if the gun I was shooting was my CCW. I responded by saying that I don't carry because I'm a teacher and therefore effectively disarmed as most of my day is spent traveling to work, at work, or traveling home from work.
 
I'm all for trained armed teachers, but IMO it would be best if the gun was concealed and never disclosed from a purely functional standpoint.
That would limit the possibility, justified or not, of a student trying to gain control, and any active shooters from knowing who to watch for or stay away from.
 
I'm all for trained armed teachers, but IMO it would be best if the gun was concealed and never disclosed from a purely functional standpoint.
That would limit the possibility, justified or not, of a student trying to gain control, and any active shooters from knowing who to watch for or stay away from.

"...justified or not..." Interesting. Could you clarify? In what condition or scenario do you feel a student would be justified in trying to gain control of a teacher's handgun?
 
And if that training is being conducted by the local law enforcement branch, I wonder how much of it is close to academy training. Last I checked, which was decades ago, the academy for reserve officer in Florida was 800 hours. If this is a quality training program, you're already 1/4 of the way there.

It's scarry to think what they will come up next as a viable school safety measure. I sincerely hope that is just stopgap measure.
 
While not Prophets of Doom but certainly regurgitating FAILED POSITIONS of those who are anti-2A (or political softies who are Left-lite types)...

In general, the arguments against ANY types of concealed carry having been heard way way way way way (X362) b4...

Oh! There will be blood running in the streets (classroom halls) -FAIL
Oh! There will be mass NDs and ADs (and therefore no ABCs) -FAIL
Oh! OH!! There will be gun snatchings from the perps (in this case, the students...who...do...not...now.....snatch teachers purses, wallets, or OTHER similar personal effects) -FAIL

aaall been hollered b4 ...from the :neener:LefT. Again I say.... FAIL.


Oh! New stuff here. Lest we forget, in an ever increasing # of states allowing Constitutional Carry, these teachers somehow walk from the real world, into a ''enclosed bubble'', where eViL sPirITs :alien:abound ( I guess LoL), and somehow are needed to pass extra high bar scrutiny super-a-duper training -FAIL (coming soon to a school district near you)
 
"...justified or not..." Interesting. Could you clarify? In what condition or scenario do you feel a student would be justified in trying to gain control of a teacher's handgun?
Let me rephrase that: I meant that it would limit the possibility and thus the fear of it, justified or not.
 
I would not qualify that as a fail, but as a placebo pill where real medication is needed for treatment. I suppose "beggars can't be choosers" and teacher with a gun will make some feel better. I suppose something is better than nothing.
I understand real sutions cost money and thankfully school shootings are rare and random events.
 
Last edited:
Florida authorized arming teachers after a "school resource officer", a career cop; failed in his job: Some responding deputies hid behind cars rather than storming the school.

IMO: Arming teachers is feel good stuff.
 
I know that the Texas law requires school marshals (as they're called there) does require that armed staff members also complete the same standards of firearms training as is required of LEOs.

I had not heard of the Marshal plan. It may be because of the expense of attaining and maintaining certification does not make it the plan more commonly implemented. There is another plan, the original plan IIRC correctly that is referred to as the Guardian plan that is much less expensive with much less certification requirements. Schools can choose either one if they want to arm teachers. I think we would all like to see them arming teachers who have gone through the very expensive Marshall plan, but that isn't nearly as likely to happen as teachers going through the Guardian plan.

This is an ad, but summarizes the two plans. It also provides the code for each for those who wish to look up specific information from either plan.
https://www.schoolsafetycertification.com/marshal-vs-safety
 
It's strange that people would be concerned about teachers having their guns grabbed, given that almost no one is worried about kids grabbing firearms from police and guards. We don't worry that kids will grab baseball bats from phys. ed. teachers and start bludgeoning each other. We don't worry about kids turning shop tools on their peers. Seems like a manufactured concern. Why grab a gun from a teacher, risking being shot, when you can bring one from home?

The point of the law is to make shooters think twice before attacking schools. Right now, in many areas, potential shooters know they can arrive on campus and kill people without opposition until the police arrive (much later). If they know they may face opposition as soon as they begin shooting, they are likely to call off their attacks or go somewhere else.
 
It's strange that people would be concerned about teachers having their guns grabbed, given that almost no one is worried about kids grabbing firearms from police and guards.

Many have expressed concerns about guns being introduced into schools, even by cops. However, most (I think) see cops as being focused on security matters, unlike teachers who are focused on teaching, hence it not being an issue.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/...s-to-place-armed-guards-in-elementary-schools
https://pacificnewscenter.com/not-enough-school-security-but-parents-dont-want-armed-sros/
https://baristanet.com/2018/06/plan...mfield-elementary-schools-causes-controversy/
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...-Guards-and-Teachers-Won-t-Make-Schools-Safer

However, where most of the articles I could find were positive for professional armed guards or cops to be on campuses, when it came to armed teachers, most were against armed teachers.
 
Many have expressed concerns about guns being introduced into schools, even by cops. However, most (I think) see cops as being focused on security matters, unlike teachers who are focused on teaching, hence it not being an issue.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/...s-to-place-armed-guards-in-elementary-schools
https://pacificnewscenter.com/not-enough-school-security-but-parents-dont-want-armed-sros/
https://baristanet.com/2018/06/plan...mfield-elementary-schools-causes-controversy/
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...-Guards-and-Teachers-Won-t-Make-Schools-Safer

However, where most of the articles I could find were positive for professional armed guards or cops to be on campuses, when it came to armed teachers, most were against armed teachers.

The Daily Kos is against guns in schools! Amazing! Who would have guessed? And the quality of their arguments is right up there with their usual high standards. I particularly like the way they cited a case in which a kid shot someone OUTSIDE of school and called it a school shooting.

It's remarkable that a plumber or a theater usher doesn't have to give up the legal right to bear arms in order to do his job, but a teacher is.
 
It's remarkable that a plumber or a theater usher doesn't have to give up the legal right to bear arms in order to do his job, but a teacher is.

We give up a lot rights. 1st, 2nd, 4th. In many ways, it's a lot like joining the army.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top