First Layer of Defense Against School Violence

Status
Not open for further replies.
luzyfuerza

luzyfuerza

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
1,422
Location
RKBA-Friendly Utah
Utah law allows adults, including teachers, who have carry permits to carry concealed guns in public schools.

This is an appropriate last line of defense against school murders, I believe.

However, as we regularly discuss here on THR, plans for defense of self, loved ones, home, etc. (and classrooms...), should have multiple layers.

In this state, one of these additional layers is a phone app (the SafeUT app) that lets anyone easily report threats of school violence to law enforcement. This app has been in place since 2016.

In 2018, officials received 534 tips regarding potential school threats, including 175 tips about planned school attacks. More details can be found here:

https://www.ksl.com/article/4652579...rted-through-safeut-app-in-2018-officials-say


[sarcasm on] With successful tools like this available, why do you suppose that the first proposed reaction in the event of a school attack typically is to outlaw or restrict guns? [sarcasm off]
 
Last edited:
luzyfuerza said:
Utah law allows adults, including teachers, who have carry permits to carry concealed guns in public schools.

This is an appropriate last line of defense against school murders, I believe.

However, as we regularly discuss here on THR, plans for defense of self, loved ones, home, etc. (and classrooms...), should have multiple layers.

In this state, one of these additional layers is a phone app (the SafeUT app) that lets anyone easily report threats of school violence to law enforcement. This app has been in place since 2016.

In 2018, officials received 534 tips regarding potential school threats, including 175 tips about planned school attacks. More details can be found here:

https://www.ksl.com/article/4652579...rted-through-safeut-app-in-2018-officials-say


With successful tools like this available, why do you suppose that the first proposed reaction in the event of a school attack typically is to outlaw or restrict guns?
Click to expand...
Oh come on. Many, many folks practice KISS. KEEP IT SIMPLE S*****. The kids were killed by the function of guns. Therefore no guns, no kids killed. It may be wrong, but it isn't that hard to understand.
 
In the whole US, we had a total of 17,250 homicides of all types. The best estimate is that we also had 2.5 million defensive gun uses (US CDC study). That means that defensive gun uses are 145 times more common than homicides. It is far, far more likely that a firearm will be used to prevent a crime than to commit a homicide.

Luzyfuerza has it right. Teachers and staff have been allowed to carry here for years, with almost zero problems. Try shooting up one of our schools and the art teacher or the custodian might well pop a cap on you. Best of all, it doesn't cost the taxpayers a dime. One sweet, grandmotherly teacher I know is also an NRA Distinguished Expert marksman with a handgun. You'd never expect her to be the one fighting back.
 
As a public school employee, I am always interested in the level of ignorance spouted by those who truly, irrevocably believe that by declaring a zone "gun free" that it will really remain gun free. The fears they express are almost always provably false but facts never trump fear in the political arena...
 
Facts that do not align with the party mantra from the central authority are to be ignored.
 
I'm not opposed to tip lines. But they have their own problems, including false reports. Of those 700+ tips in Utah last year how many were real threats. School and LE officials reach the point where they don't have the resources to respond to all of them. They still have to evaluate which are valid and which are not. With almost all of the school shootings in the past there were tips to either school or LE officials that weren't taken seriously. Figuring out which are valid is the key.

I taught for 30 years, been retired for 9 and still substitute a few days a month. I have 3 grandkids still in school so I'm as interested in school safety as anyone. I'm not opposed to teachers who want to carry and legally can doing so. I would if allowed, but that isn't happening here just yet. Maybe someday.

Regardless, the best 1st line of defense is to limit access to schools. Our county has done a much better job of that in the last few years. When I taught all the outside doors were open. Anyone could access multiple doors into the schools at any time. There were some reasons why that was a good idea at the time. But not with the threats possible today. The school where I used to work now only has 2 doors unlocked during the AM and PM as kids are entering and leaving. One for bus riders, one for car riders on opposite sides of the school. A deputy is on duty at each door. After the late bell rings in the AM the car rider door is locked and the only way into the building is the front door, and you can only go as far as a small lobby. To get past that door you have to be buzzed in.

We still don't have a full time LE officer for every school. They send enough out during the mornings, and we have 8 full time officers. There are 4 high schools in our county. One stays at each high school full time, the others move between the middle and elementary schools feeding each high school during the day. One of elementary schools, the middle school and high school in my district are in separate buildings, but all on the same tract of land. The other elementary school is about 4 miles away. Response times could be pretty fast between the schools.
 
luzyfuerza said:
why do you suppose that the first proposed reaction in the event of a school attack typically is to outlaw or restrict guns?
Click to expand...
They are antis, it's what they do. The hardcore antis behind all the gun control pushes don't care about your kids, they care about disarming you, knowing in the long run it will cost innocent lives, but they don't care, you being disarmed is more important to them. Of course many "antis" are well meaning dupes who think they are doing good.
rpenmanparker said:
The kids were killed by the function of guns. Therefore no guns, no kids killed. It may be wrong, but it isn't that hard to understand.
Click to expand...
If you are saying it makes sense that if they outlaw guns there will be no kids killed in schools by nut jobs/haters, you're dreaming. Nut jobs will still be able to get guns, or they will simply pick another weapon, like running 50 kids over in the parking lot with a stolen car.
 
Walkalong said:
They are antis, it's what they do. The hardcore antis behind all the gun control pushes don't care about your kids, they care about disarming you, knowing in the long run it will cost innocent lives, but they don't care, you being disarmed is more important to them. Of course many "antis" are well meaning dupes who think they are doing good.

If you are saying it makes sense that if they outlaw guns there will be no kids killed in schools by nut jobs/haters, you're dreaming. Nut jobs will still be able to get guns, or they will simply pick another weapon, like running 50 kids over in the parking lot with a stolen car.
Click to expand...
I clearly said that was their belief and it could be wrong. My opinions were never offered here on this topic.
 
George P said:
The best defense is to home school your kids and keep them far away from any public school system
Click to expand...
But then these kids have to watch all movies and shop online for everything at home too as mass shootings have taken place at theaters, malls, etc.

Not to mention having to work remotely from home as shootings have taken place at workplace ...
 
rpenmanparker said:
Oh come on. Many, many folks practice KISS. KEEP IT SIMPLE S*****. The kids were killed by the function of guns. Therefore no guns, no kids killed. It may be wrong, but it isn't that hard to understand.
Click to expand...


There are between 500 million and 650 million firearms in the hands of civilians in the US. Keeping it simple, how do you propose to remove them?
 
The apps mentioned seem like they could be misused and IMHO dont seem like much of a answer.

Armed personnel both outside and inside, whether local PD, private security and or armed school employees seem like the answer to me.
 
Too much nonsense and not much of practical usage.
Closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top