Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
No nonsense video. Cool.
Preparing for school shootings.
- Thread starter jon_in_wv
- Start date
- Status
The best position I think is to assume there will be more shootings. Therefore the standard of care in any institution should be the requirement of several armed individuals on campus at all times. At least one person in each building. This may be in the form of a guard or it may be in the form of a trained teacher or other employee willing to take on additional responsibility.
rainbowbob
Member
That was an interesting video, Lee - thanks for providing the link.
My only (small) criticism would be that this video includes a stereotypical shooter that is easy to identify because he looks "different" and/or "crazed". I'm sure many THR members with long hair and flannel shirts would beg to differ. Often the active shooter will look perfectly "normal" - until they start shooting.
My only (small) criticism would be that this video includes a stereotypical shooter that is easy to identify because he looks "different" and/or "crazed". I'm sure many THR members with long hair and flannel shirts would beg to differ. Often the active shooter will look perfectly "normal" - until they start shooting.
Stick the book in a backpack and strap the backpack in front as shield and run for the door covering your head with another book.
Perhaps this is a stupid way to get out, but I think you have a better chance or survival than by playing dead. Of course, under pressure, who knows maybe people just freeze.
Perhaps this is a stupid way to get out, but I think you have a better chance or survival than by playing dead. Of course, under pressure, who knows maybe people just freeze.
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
medlogic said:
Yep. I completely agree. And as a society we are pathetically unprepared for an attack of that magnitude.
I assure you that those of us in LE are preparing for such an incident... We'll be here to take the fight to those terrorists/psychopaths, if and when that day comes!
My department does use SRO's (school resource officers) in a number of our schools. The officers holding these positions vary in background, but none of them are really slouches, at least in my part of town... One of our SRO's actually went directly into the position from SWAT (he was tired of the SWAT schedule, or lack thereof).
So, we at least have a starting point by having armed police officers in the school. Some long guns would be helpful, but an armed and trained shooter is a good starting place!
My department has been involved in several "active shooter" situations in the past decade (most noteably the Columbine HS attack). So, while the chance of such an incident occurring remains remote, the possibility is certainly still there!
sacp81170a
Member
I've already been to four Active Shooter classes in the last two years. If the number of classes and level of training in my area is an indication, LE in this country is taking school shootings very seriously. We're also training on response to suicide bombers, both vehicular and on foot. Things are getting a little hairy these days.
The Chronicle of Higher Ed on the Shotsfired tape:
Colleges Wade Into Survival Training for Campus Shootings
A new video offers tips on how to react when shots are fired
From the issue dated June 27, 2008
By ERIC HOOVER
Run here during a fire. Seek help for alcohol poisoning. Call this number if a roommate threatens suicide.
For years students have received instructions for all sorts of emergencies. But should they also learn what to do in the rare event that someone starts shooting?
This month a company in Spokane, Wash., plans to release Shots Fired on Campus, an instructional DVD with strategies for preventing and surviving a gun rampage. About 50 colleges have ordered the video, and its creators expect to sell several hundred more this fall.
The market appears ripe. Since the massacre at Virginia Tech last year, colleges everywhere have prepared for "active shooter" scenarios. As last February's fatal shootings at Northern Illinois University affirmed, however, even the most rapid police response may come too late for some people who first encounter a gunman.
That's why some campus-safety experts say colleges must better prepare those who do not wear badges. In April the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators published "The IACLEA Blueprint for Safer Campuses," in response to the Virginia Tech incident. The group recommended that colleges train students and faculty and staff members in how to respond to such emergencies. Among the training methods it recommends are residence-life programs, orientation sessions, and print and digital materials.
Although colleges everywhere have developed training programs for their employees, many stop short of asking students to think through how they might react if they heard gunshots in their building.
That's a mistake, says Randy Spivey. "Since Virginia Tech, there's been a lot of focus on law-enforcement response strategies and notification procedures," he says, "but very little on what to do if you're that person in the event."
Mr. Spivey used to run hostage-survival programs for the U.S. Department of Defense. Now he is executive director of the Center for Personal Protection & Safety, a company that specializes in prevention of workplace violence. About six months ago, his business released Shots Fired — When Lightning Strikes, a training video that recreates an office shooting. More than 300 colleges have licensed the DVD for their use.
Requests for a campus-specific version led the company to create Shots Fired on Campus, which sells for $495. For another $1,000, colleges can buy media files of the video to put up on their Web sites.
The 20-minute video, filmed at Eastern Washington and Gonzaga Universities, begins with a student hiding behind a tree and calling 911 on her cellphone. "I'm on campus … " she says. "There's a guy here shooting."
The dramatization includes footage of a man carrying a duffel bag into a campus building, then removing a handgun and a rifle. In a classroom, students look up, startled, when they hear the distant pop of guns. During a shooting "you'll need to take direct responsibility for your personal safety and security," says a narrator. "You must develop a survival mind-set."
Shots Fired, which includes interviews with law-enforcement experts, shows viewers how they might live through such an ordeal by running, hiding, or barricading a door. It also depicts how, by spreading out and working together, a group of people might overpower and disarm a shooter.
The video does not tell viewers what to do, however. "We're giving them a mental permission slip," Mr. Spivey says, "to think about the options they have."
'Delicate' Message
Shawn Burns thinks those options are empowering. This spring Mr. Burns, chief of police at West Texas A&M University, gave 65-minute presentations on campus shootings to some first-year students — something he had never done before.
After showing Shots Fired to small groups, Mr. Burns asked students to think about what they could do if a shooter had just entered their building. Could they jump out the window safely? Could they block the door with tables and chairs, maybe tie it shut with a belt? Could they throw their books or shoes at a gunman as a last resort?
Such exercises, he believes, plant a seed that would help students react quickly in a worst-case scenario. "We know that at Virginia Tech some students took proactive measures and survived the attack," he says. "We also know some of them didn't."
Although students tend to find the presentation reassuring, it carries a "shock factor," Mr. Burns says. How can colleges make sure that factor is not too great?
"It's delicate," says Lt. James T. Watkins of the University of North Carolina at Wilmington's police department. "The delivery is really important. You don't want to freak students out."
Recently police officers at Wilmington led several workshops on surviving campus shootings. A total of 1,500 faculty and staff members and students participated. The sessions, which do not include a video, are less a how to than a pep talk. "I'm not going to stand up there with a gun on my hip and tell you to overpower a shooter," Mr. Watkins says. "But I'll tell you I'm not going to get on the ground and be executed."
Several colleges that have purchased Shots Fired on Campus plan to show it to some, but not all students. The University of North Florida plans to incorporate the video into resident-assistant training before inviting members of student organizations to view it.
Clemson University plans to put the video on its network, so anyone on the campus can view it online. Johnson W. Link, chief of police, says he and his officers will also show it during presentations on campus safety, so they can answer questions. "This is a message people don't want to process," he says.
A Matter of Balance
Legal experts speculate that a training video with specific survival tips could prove controversial in the aftermath of a fatal shooting. "Plaintiffs' lawyers would scrutinize it through the least forgiving lens," says Peter F. Lake, director of the Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy. Nonetheless, Mr. Lake says, he sees value in discussing survival skills.
Such training may have benefits, as long as it does not distract from preventive efforts to identify and help troubled students, says Alyssa S. Keehan, a risk analyst with United Educators Insurance, a major insurer of colleges. "If a college wants the community to feel prepared," she says, "the training given should not promote unfounded fear about campus shootings."
After all, such events, while devastating, are rare. Robert S. Flowers, vice president for student affairs at Hobart and William Smith Colleges, says there is limited time to tell students about a host of potential threats. "We have to balance that," he says. This fall freshmen on his campus will watch a video about fire safety, but not one about shootings.
Still, Gwendolyn J. Dungy, executive director of National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, predicts that Shots Fired on Campus will continue to sell. "People are grasping at anything that could be a resource," she says. "Nobody wants to look as if they didn't prepare."
----------- Nice tape that avoids the issue of concealed carry on campus. I understand that if it was recommended - it wouldn't sell to the vast majority of colleges. I also have to comment on the fear of liability. My cynical view is that most colleges only care liability first. This is from personal experience.
Unfortunately, most of these suggestions won't stop the first wave of killings for many rampage situations. We have an excellent department but the first few minutes will see the first 10-20 dead or injured.
Colleges Wade Into Survival Training for Campus Shootings
A new video offers tips on how to react when shots are fired
From the issue dated June 27, 2008
By ERIC HOOVER
Run here during a fire. Seek help for alcohol poisoning. Call this number if a roommate threatens suicide.
For years students have received instructions for all sorts of emergencies. But should they also learn what to do in the rare event that someone starts shooting?
This month a company in Spokane, Wash., plans to release Shots Fired on Campus, an instructional DVD with strategies for preventing and surviving a gun rampage. About 50 colleges have ordered the video, and its creators expect to sell several hundred more this fall.
The market appears ripe. Since the massacre at Virginia Tech last year, colleges everywhere have prepared for "active shooter" scenarios. As last February's fatal shootings at Northern Illinois University affirmed, however, even the most rapid police response may come too late for some people who first encounter a gunman.
That's why some campus-safety experts say colleges must better prepare those who do not wear badges. In April the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators published "The IACLEA Blueprint for Safer Campuses," in response to the Virginia Tech incident. The group recommended that colleges train students and faculty and staff members in how to respond to such emergencies. Among the training methods it recommends are residence-life programs, orientation sessions, and print and digital materials.
Although colleges everywhere have developed training programs for their employees, many stop short of asking students to think through how they might react if they heard gunshots in their building.
That's a mistake, says Randy Spivey. "Since Virginia Tech, there's been a lot of focus on law-enforcement response strategies and notification procedures," he says, "but very little on what to do if you're that person in the event."
Mr. Spivey used to run hostage-survival programs for the U.S. Department of Defense. Now he is executive director of the Center for Personal Protection & Safety, a company that specializes in prevention of workplace violence. About six months ago, his business released Shots Fired — When Lightning Strikes, a training video that recreates an office shooting. More than 300 colleges have licensed the DVD for their use.
Requests for a campus-specific version led the company to create Shots Fired on Campus, which sells for $495. For another $1,000, colleges can buy media files of the video to put up on their Web sites.
The 20-minute video, filmed at Eastern Washington and Gonzaga Universities, begins with a student hiding behind a tree and calling 911 on her cellphone. "I'm on campus … " she says. "There's a guy here shooting."
The dramatization includes footage of a man carrying a duffel bag into a campus building, then removing a handgun and a rifle. In a classroom, students look up, startled, when they hear the distant pop of guns. During a shooting "you'll need to take direct responsibility for your personal safety and security," says a narrator. "You must develop a survival mind-set."
Shots Fired, which includes interviews with law-enforcement experts, shows viewers how they might live through such an ordeal by running, hiding, or barricading a door. It also depicts how, by spreading out and working together, a group of people might overpower and disarm a shooter.
The video does not tell viewers what to do, however. "We're giving them a mental permission slip," Mr. Spivey says, "to think about the options they have."
'Delicate' Message
Shawn Burns thinks those options are empowering. This spring Mr. Burns, chief of police at West Texas A&M University, gave 65-minute presentations on campus shootings to some first-year students — something he had never done before.
After showing Shots Fired to small groups, Mr. Burns asked students to think about what they could do if a shooter had just entered their building. Could they jump out the window safely? Could they block the door with tables and chairs, maybe tie it shut with a belt? Could they throw their books or shoes at a gunman as a last resort?
Such exercises, he believes, plant a seed that would help students react quickly in a worst-case scenario. "We know that at Virginia Tech some students took proactive measures and survived the attack," he says. "We also know some of them didn't."
Although students tend to find the presentation reassuring, it carries a "shock factor," Mr. Burns says. How can colleges make sure that factor is not too great?
"It's delicate," says Lt. James T. Watkins of the University of North Carolina at Wilmington's police department. "The delivery is really important. You don't want to freak students out."
Recently police officers at Wilmington led several workshops on surviving campus shootings. A total of 1,500 faculty and staff members and students participated. The sessions, which do not include a video, are less a how to than a pep talk. "I'm not going to stand up there with a gun on my hip and tell you to overpower a shooter," Mr. Watkins says. "But I'll tell you I'm not going to get on the ground and be executed."
Several colleges that have purchased Shots Fired on Campus plan to show it to some, but not all students. The University of North Florida plans to incorporate the video into resident-assistant training before inviting members of student organizations to view it.
Clemson University plans to put the video on its network, so anyone on the campus can view it online. Johnson W. Link, chief of police, says he and his officers will also show it during presentations on campus safety, so they can answer questions. "This is a message people don't want to process," he says.
A Matter of Balance
Legal experts speculate that a training video with specific survival tips could prove controversial in the aftermath of a fatal shooting. "Plaintiffs' lawyers would scrutinize it through the least forgiving lens," says Peter F. Lake, director of the Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy. Nonetheless, Mr. Lake says, he sees value in discussing survival skills.
Such training may have benefits, as long as it does not distract from preventive efforts to identify and help troubled students, says Alyssa S. Keehan, a risk analyst with United Educators Insurance, a major insurer of colleges. "If a college wants the community to feel prepared," she says, "the training given should not promote unfounded fear about campus shootings."
After all, such events, while devastating, are rare. Robert S. Flowers, vice president for student affairs at Hobart and William Smith Colleges, says there is limited time to tell students about a host of potential threats. "We have to balance that," he says. This fall freshmen on his campus will watch a video about fire safety, but not one about shootings.
Still, Gwendolyn J. Dungy, executive director of National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, predicts that Shots Fired on Campus will continue to sell. "People are grasping at anything that could be a resource," she says. "Nobody wants to look as if they didn't prepare."
----------- Nice tape that avoids the issue of concealed carry on campus. I understand that if it was recommended - it wouldn't sell to the vast majority of colleges. I also have to comment on the fear of liability. My cynical view is that most colleges only care liability first. This is from personal experience.
Unfortunately, most of these suggestions won't stop the first wave of killings for many rampage situations. We have an excellent department but the first few minutes will see the first 10-20 dead or injured.
I don't think arming teachers K-12 and under is a good solution. Teachers don't get paid nearly enough for the level of responsibility that entails handling an arm to defend a classroom.
Unless the teacher has gone through some real serious training, would you trust that he/she could handle the weapon safely in a stress situation?
I don't want to be a party poop per, but not all situations are best handled by throwing guns at the problem.
Perhaps if the curriculum of each educator included a couple of courses in hostage/nut case negotiations and a semester in arms handling that may prove worth while. But in that case it is probably less expensive just to beef up campus security.
Unless the teacher has gone through some real serious training, would you trust that he/she could handle the weapon safely in a stress situation?
I don't want to be a party poop per, but not all situations are best handled by throwing guns at the problem.
Perhaps if the curriculum of each educator included a couple of courses in hostage/nut case negotiations and a semester in arms handling that may prove worth while. But in that case it is probably less expensive just to beef up campus security.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
I don't know how we are going to get many public school teachers who can't even control a classroom of students to be able to be able to responsibly control a firearm.
By the way, why don't we go ahead and aside from getting their trained as active shooter reactionary forces, get them EMT training as well?
By the way, why don't we go ahead and aside from getting their trained as active shooter reactionary forces, get them EMT training as well?
redraidermgr
Member
I am all for a CCW on campuses. I work the graveyard at a university and have to walk through a rough neighborhood to get to work. No car yet but I am stuck with a pocket knife for protection. During the semester I often wonder why cant we have CCW on Campus incase someone does flip out.
A year back a small college near us had a stabbing where an ex wigged out and stabbed his ex in broad daylight with a hunting knife something like 9 times with about 20 kids around before anyone could act to prevent it or stop it. He then stabbed himself twice in the throat. He was just convicted and is only getting something like 2-5 years.
I would personally feel more protected if I could walk to work carrying without worrying about a felony charge. I am a law abiding citizen and would never carry without permit or where it is illegal to carry but I dont feel like I should make myself an easier target (6'4'' 275 with a pocket knife is not exactly an easy target) simply because I chose to work at and attend a school of higher learning.
A year back a small college near us had a stabbing where an ex wigged out and stabbed his ex in broad daylight with a hunting knife something like 9 times with about 20 kids around before anyone could act to prevent it or stop it. He then stabbed himself twice in the throat. He was just convicted and is only getting something like 2-5 years.
I would personally feel more protected if I could walk to work carrying without worrying about a felony charge. I am a law abiding citizen and would never carry without permit or where it is illegal to carry but I dont feel like I should make myself an easier target (6'4'' 275 with a pocket knife is not exactly an easy target) simply because I chose to work at and attend a school of higher learning.
B.D. Turner
Member
Armed teachers. Nothing else needs to be said.
Most (not all) college level teachers are so liberal they wouldn't carry if they could.
Most (not all) college level teachers are so liberal they wouldn't carry if they could.
The issue is not to require teachers to be armed. Duh.
The reasonable proposal is to allow those teachers have to gone to the trouble of getting a permit or license in their state to carry at work.
For all you, who would argue against this specific proposal because they aren't as well trained as you or too liberal - well, then - you've argued against concealed carry in general. What is the difference between the school vs. church or the mall?
None. Raise your kids in your compound in the mountains if you think the risk that an armed teacher will kill your kid by accident in a shooting rampage outweighs the possible benefit of stopping a massacre of little ones. Or perhaps, you would prefer that an armed teacher not have the chance to stop some rapist monster who takes over a classroom to molest and/or kill the females. God Forbid, a liberal save your kid from that.
As it stands now, a teacher cannot have a reasonable chance to stop such. And some of you think that's just fine.
The reasonable proposal is to allow those teachers have to gone to the trouble of getting a permit or license in their state to carry at work.
For all you, who would argue against this specific proposal because they aren't as well trained as you or too liberal - well, then - you've argued against concealed carry in general. What is the difference between the school vs. church or the mall?
None. Raise your kids in your compound in the mountains if you think the risk that an armed teacher will kill your kid by accident in a shooting rampage outweighs the possible benefit of stopping a massacre of little ones. Or perhaps, you would prefer that an armed teacher not have the chance to stop some rapist monster who takes over a classroom to molest and/or kill the females. God Forbid, a liberal save your kid from that.
As it stands now, a teacher cannot have a reasonable chance to stop such. And some of you think that's just fine.
GEM,
Anyone with a clean record and a 2 day course can get a ccw permit. That does not make the person an expert in the matter. Would you trust your kid's life to that person? An active shooter presents a very complex situation for a novice like a teacher to handle. What if the shooter takes a hostage and the teacher decides he/she is good enough to take a head shot? Would you be Ok with that if it were your kid caught in between?
Stop accusing people who disagree with you of being tree hugging liberals. In matters as serious as this one, the least anyone can do is analyze the issues from all angles. Even play devil's advocate if it means arriving at a higher level of understanding. This forum is, after all, called the high road for that reason.
Anyone with a clean record and a 2 day course can get a ccw permit. That does not make the person an expert in the matter. Would you trust your kid's life to that person? An active shooter presents a very complex situation for a novice like a teacher to handle. What if the shooter takes a hostage and the teacher decides he/she is good enough to take a head shot? Would you be Ok with that if it were your kid caught in between?
Stop accusing people who disagree with you of being tree hugging liberals. In matters as serious as this one, the least anyone can do is analyze the issues from all angles. Even play devil's advocate if it means arriving at a higher level of understanding. This forum is, after all, called the high road for that reason.
Strawman arguments that negate the reason for anyone to have a permit without very advanced training.
Explain to me the difference between a school looney and a church looney?
Should carry be banned in both? In both, you have a packed environment of victims that will be killed en masse if no effective action is taken.
That's the pattern of most rampages, not the hostage scenario.
In the workplace, a rampage shooter could take a hostage - so no carry in the workplace should be allowed.
As far as the High Road here - I have no use for those who will take away the basic right of self-defense because of hypotheticals from the Brady Bunch play book.
I give you these choices - again!
A madman comes into a large classroom:
1. He tells all the men to leave. They do as they don't have effective means of self-defense. He starts shooting all the women.
2. He tells the teachers to leave, they do. He then starts to molest the teenage girls. When SWAT arrives he shoots several in the head before his demise.
3. He tells the teachers to leave. He barricades up - he has brought KY Jelly to rape the little girls. One little girl offers herself up as a victim to stall for time for the other kids. When SWAT enters he kills or wounds several before his demise.
4. A teacher hears shots next door, he uses his own body to hold the door closed and is killed through the door as his kids flee.
or
A teacher who has gotten a permit may stop the person. Maybe an innocent takes a round from the teacher but 20 are saved. But that's a low probability as compared to the high probably of being killed by the existing threat. Maybe a child isn't raped.
It's really that simple and those who don't get it are doing the work of the the antiforces.
BTW, I'm probably closer. to being a tree hugging liberal than a true conservative. My view is that those who oppose the instantiation of the RKBA are not my friends or worthy of respect if they have actually thought through the complex issue.
If the complexity suggests that teachers are best being unarmedvictims if they want to defend themselves or kids should face murder and rape until SWAT arrives, then I don't understand the complexity.
Also, I have some experience with firearms and have no use for those who deny me the ability to defend while they prowl around WalMart in full Mall Ninja bravado.
Explain to me the difference between a school looney and a church looney?
Should carry be banned in both? In both, you have a packed environment of victims that will be killed en masse if no effective action is taken.
That's the pattern of most rampages, not the hostage scenario.
In the workplace, a rampage shooter could take a hostage - so no carry in the workplace should be allowed.
As far as the High Road here - I have no use for those who will take away the basic right of self-defense because of hypotheticals from the Brady Bunch play book.
I give you these choices - again!
A madman comes into a large classroom:
1. He tells all the men to leave. They do as they don't have effective means of self-defense. He starts shooting all the women.
2. He tells the teachers to leave, they do. He then starts to molest the teenage girls. When SWAT arrives he shoots several in the head before his demise.
3. He tells the teachers to leave. He barricades up - he has brought KY Jelly to rape the little girls. One little girl offers herself up as a victim to stall for time for the other kids. When SWAT enters he kills or wounds several before his demise.
4. A teacher hears shots next door, he uses his own body to hold the door closed and is killed through the door as his kids flee.
or
A teacher who has gotten a permit may stop the person. Maybe an innocent takes a round from the teacher but 20 are saved. But that's a low probability as compared to the high probably of being killed by the existing threat. Maybe a child isn't raped.
It's really that simple and those who don't get it are doing the work of the the antiforces.
BTW, I'm probably closer. to being a tree hugging liberal than a true conservative. My view is that those who oppose the instantiation of the RKBA are not my friends or worthy of respect if they have actually thought through the complex issue.
If the complexity suggests that teachers are best being unarmedvictims if they want to defend themselves or kids should face murder and rape until SWAT arrives, then I don't understand the complexity.
Also, I have some experience with firearms and have no use for those who deny me the ability to defend while they prowl around WalMart in full Mall Ninja bravado.
Last edited:
gallo,
We have to be realistic in our expectations here. We as a nation do not have the resources nor the political will to harden every school facility in the country and staff it with a trained and properly equipped security force. Hardening every school building in the country would require billions of dollars as many buildings would simply have to be replaced because they were never designed to be fortresses and it wouldn't be feasible to rebuild them into a fortress.
Hiring, training and equipping a security force that would be on site at every school building in the country would also be a billion dollars or more. We're not talking about rent-a-cops at minimum wage here, we're talking about highly trained shooters who have what it takes to ignore the cries of the wounded children, advance to the sound of gunfire and eliminate the threat. We're talking about hours and hours of sustainment training and $50K plus a man in salary and benefits. Figure a minimum manning of 4 on duty at every campus and on larger campuses perhaps 16 or more every day that students are present. This will require a 24-7 presence on college campuses.
Do you want to raise your taxes enough to pay for this? While this would be the optimum response, it's not going to happen. You know it and I know it. So lets just take it off the table.
Other options like arming the teachers, well, if I've said it once, I've said it 1000 times, guns are not a magic talisman and their mere presence will not keep evil away. An armed person who doesn't have the will to act is just a victim.
This leaves us with GEM's proposal to let anyone who is legally authorized to carry a firearm to carry on school property. Is it optimal, of course not. But we can't afford optimal. Is it better then arming teachers, yes. Someone who wants to carry a weapon is more likely to act then someone who is told they have to because it's part of their job description.
Jeff
We have to be realistic in our expectations here. We as a nation do not have the resources nor the political will to harden every school facility in the country and staff it with a trained and properly equipped security force. Hardening every school building in the country would require billions of dollars as many buildings would simply have to be replaced because they were never designed to be fortresses and it wouldn't be feasible to rebuild them into a fortress.
Hiring, training and equipping a security force that would be on site at every school building in the country would also be a billion dollars or more. We're not talking about rent-a-cops at minimum wage here, we're talking about highly trained shooters who have what it takes to ignore the cries of the wounded children, advance to the sound of gunfire and eliminate the threat. We're talking about hours and hours of sustainment training and $50K plus a man in salary and benefits. Figure a minimum manning of 4 on duty at every campus and on larger campuses perhaps 16 or more every day that students are present. This will require a 24-7 presence on college campuses.
Do you want to raise your taxes enough to pay for this? While this would be the optimum response, it's not going to happen. You know it and I know it. So lets just take it off the table.
Other options like arming the teachers, well, if I've said it once, I've said it 1000 times, guns are not a magic talisman and their mere presence will not keep evil away. An armed person who doesn't have the will to act is just a victim.
This leaves us with GEM's proposal to let anyone who is legally authorized to carry a firearm to carry on school property. Is it optimal, of course not. But we can't afford optimal. Is it better then arming teachers, yes. Someone who wants to carry a weapon is more likely to act then someone who is told they have to because it's part of their job description.
Jeff
schools have taken some fairly simple steps to increase security such as locking the entrance doors during the day. its not a perfect solution, but it makes it a little harder for a casual crook to get in.
forcing teachers to be armed won't work. a lot of teachers just do not have the desire, the skills, or the nerve to even consider resisting a criminal.
allowing them to be armed might work but I suspect the students would figure out who is armed and who isn't pretty quick. maybe a lock box could work.
i just do not think there is a very good answer to this kind of problem, short of home schooling.
<added> there are some interesting comments about this very subject on secondcitycop. it seems the chicago pd has yet to send any of its street officers in for the active shooter training. I gather from the comments that the state police and most suburban departments have taken the class, but only a few specialized units at CPD.
One comment was that they expected the training would be via streaming video. I am not sure the poster was kidding.
forcing teachers to be armed won't work. a lot of teachers just do not have the desire, the skills, or the nerve to even consider resisting a criminal.
allowing them to be armed might work but I suspect the students would figure out who is armed and who isn't pretty quick. maybe a lock box could work.
i just do not think there is a very good answer to this kind of problem, short of home schooling.
<added> there are some interesting comments about this very subject on secondcitycop. it seems the chicago pd has yet to send any of its street officers in for the active shooter training. I gather from the comments that the state police and most suburban departments have taken the class, but only a few specialized units at CPD.
One comment was that they expected the training would be via streaming video. I am not sure the poster was kidding.
Jeff, Gem,
First, let me tell you that I mean no disrespect to your positions and to a great extent share your concerns and views.
However, hypothetical scenarios of women getting raped force the conclusion in favor armed teachers, but by no means render it valid. In my opinion, there are better ways to secure schools than to let teachers who although may have the best of intentions may not have enough training or experience to sort such a situation. To compare a school scenario to one at church is invalid since school is mandatory and church is not. Why not start by arming security guards whose training and job decription more closely fits the bill. In my high school we had 5 guards armed with mace. With the proper training, they could have been issued firearms.
There is nothing wrong with packing to work if your employer allows it. However, in the case of armed teachers people will automatically assume that it's the teachers responsibility to act and act like professional LEOs. This will seldom be the case as teachers are not trained like LEOs. Assume the teacher uses his gun to get out of harm but leaves the class. Will he face consequences by the board? Can you as a parent assume he will act for the greater good? Certainly, he is not getting paid to defend the class room only to teach. This kind of conflicts make this issue not as clear cut as we'd like it to be.
The cannons of gun grabbing liberals are loaded with cowboyish rhetoric form the far right. The 2nd amendment is not served rightly by defending it with far fetched hypothetical scenarios of five year old girls being raped while men watch impotent. These fear based arguments are unwarranted and no different than the ones used by anti-gun proponents.
At this forum we go back and forth about my 9 is better than your 45 and so on so forth. Its plain, harmless fun. But when it comes to issues of gun control the message from us to the rest of the world should be logical and thoughtful of other's hesitation. My way or the highway attitude only alienates 2nd amendment proponents into the gun nut category. This is detrimental to the cause. Along with our yearly check to the NRA, we should also think and talk responsibly about our cause.
First, let me tell you that I mean no disrespect to your positions and to a great extent share your concerns and views.
However, hypothetical scenarios of women getting raped force the conclusion in favor armed teachers, but by no means render it valid. In my opinion, there are better ways to secure schools than to let teachers who although may have the best of intentions may not have enough training or experience to sort such a situation. To compare a school scenario to one at church is invalid since school is mandatory and church is not. Why not start by arming security guards whose training and job decription more closely fits the bill. In my high school we had 5 guards armed with mace. With the proper training, they could have been issued firearms.
There is nothing wrong with packing to work if your employer allows it. However, in the case of armed teachers people will automatically assume that it's the teachers responsibility to act and act like professional LEOs. This will seldom be the case as teachers are not trained like LEOs. Assume the teacher uses his gun to get out of harm but leaves the class. Will he face consequences by the board? Can you as a parent assume he will act for the greater good? Certainly, he is not getting paid to defend the class room only to teach. This kind of conflicts make this issue not as clear cut as we'd like it to be.
The cannons of gun grabbing liberals are loaded with cowboyish rhetoric form the far right. The 2nd amendment is not served rightly by defending it with far fetched hypothetical scenarios of five year old girls being raped while men watch impotent. These fear based arguments are unwarranted and no different than the ones used by anti-gun proponents.
At this forum we go back and forth about my 9 is better than your 45 and so on so forth. Its plain, harmless fun. But when it comes to issues of gun control the message from us to the rest of the world should be logical and thoughtful of other's hesitation. My way or the highway attitude only alienates 2nd amendment proponents into the gun nut category. This is detrimental to the cause. Along with our yearly check to the NRA, we should also think and talk responsibly about our cause.
Last edited:
hypothetical scenarios of women getting raped
The incident where the males were ordered to leave and the women students killed occurred at a university in Montreal.
The molesting of high schools happened a few years ago in high school.
The pedophile rampage shooter happened in the Amish incident.
The teacher was shot through the door at VT.
No hypotheticals. Real incidents that might have come out differently a teacher with a CCW permit or CHL were present.
Thus folks without knowledge of what really has happened have little worth in this debate. Easy to find on wikipedia or other sources of school shootings. Those who don't have such knowledge are just like those folks worrying about ceramic Glocks on airliners.
Since my position is that if you have such a license, you should be able to carry at work - even if that is a school - I find the arguments against such at the attempt to paint those who actually know a bit about school shootings and the use of firearms defensively as cowboys is ridiculous.
The incident where the males were ordered to leave and the women students killed occurred at a university in Montreal.
The molesting of high schools happened a few years ago in high school.
The pedophile rampage shooter happened in the Amish incident.
The teacher was shot through the door at VT.
No hypotheticals. Real incidents that might have come out differently a teacher with a CCW permit or CHL were present.
Thus folks without knowledge of what really has happened have little worth in this debate. Easy to find on wikipedia or other sources of school shootings. Those who don't have such knowledge are just like those folks worrying about ceramic Glocks on airliners.
Since my position is that if you have such a license, you should be able to carry at work - even if that is a school - I find the arguments against such at the attempt to paint those who actually know a bit about school shootings and the use of firearms defensively as cowboys is ridiculous.
Kentucky Kernel
Member
University faculty and CCW
This is an issue that I have thought about for quite some time. I have had a CCW permit for years and have carried almost 100% of the time. No big deal, right? But, I am a full, tenured professor at a midwest university. I am a conservative NRA member in a sea of liberals, so carrying IS a big deal around my workplace. I have thought long and hard about whether I should keep my .38 in my car, in my office, on my person, in my briefcase, etc. Of course I am not a LEO, but I target shoot nearly every week and try to develop plans for different scenarios.
As a professor, if there is a fire alarm or other emergency, I am legally responsible for ensuring that all my of students get out of the building. None of my peers care to consider that we might also want to take some responsibility for their (and our) safety if a shooter enters the classroom. I am fortunate that, as for now anyway, my campus has not said one way or another that CC is forbidden, so I am operating under the assumption that since I can legally carry concealed, that I should do so. None of my peers or students will ever know since I am quite careful with my concealment.
It's very difficult to decide how I would react if it came to pass that I'd get fired unless I left my firearm at home. I have a great job and I love what I do. But, as the saying goes, I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Is losing my job worth protecting a room full of 20 year old youngsters?
I think so.
KK
This is an issue that I have thought about for quite some time. I have had a CCW permit for years and have carried almost 100% of the time. No big deal, right? But, I am a full, tenured professor at a midwest university. I am a conservative NRA member in a sea of liberals, so carrying IS a big deal around my workplace. I have thought long and hard about whether I should keep my .38 in my car, in my office, on my person, in my briefcase, etc. Of course I am not a LEO, but I target shoot nearly every week and try to develop plans for different scenarios.
As a professor, if there is a fire alarm or other emergency, I am legally responsible for ensuring that all my of students get out of the building. None of my peers care to consider that we might also want to take some responsibility for their (and our) safety if a shooter enters the classroom. I am fortunate that, as for now anyway, my campus has not said one way or another that CC is forbidden, so I am operating under the assumption that since I can legally carry concealed, that I should do so. None of my peers or students will ever know since I am quite careful with my concealment.
It's very difficult to decide how I would react if it came to pass that I'd get fired unless I left my firearm at home. I have a great job and I love what I do. But, as the saying goes, I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Is losing my job worth protecting a room full of 20 year old youngsters?
I think so.
KK
sherman123
Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 395
i dont see what any of this talk about students being taught to "hug trees" by professors and teachers had to do with gun control. Preserving the environment has been more traditionally a liberal agenda which is completely separate from the topic of gun control and allowing it on school campuses. Furthermore, I'm not understanding why I'm always reading the term "tree-hugger" used as a derogatory word like it's a bad thing to want to breathe clean air and not destroy what God gave us. I dont see what the heck the problem with wanting a clean environment is and how that has any connection with being anti gun. Anyways, professors tend to be liberal and most will probablyfight ccw on campus or leave the school altogether if they can't get their way. It doesn't matter what their views on other topics are. My friend told me how his teacher engaged a discussion at his college campus recently concerning CCW in school. He said his teacher brought up the fact that it's permitted in Utah and was quoted as saying "I'd leave that school right away if I were a teacher there!" The only solution I see to people's unnatural fear of firearms is education about it but the current education system seems to work the opposite way.
Patrick_Henry
Member
Gallo,
I understand that we want to see a situation in which we have well trained defenders present. However, the government is unlikely to invest enough money for all schools to have well trained and equipped defense forces. While perhaps allowing teachers to carry means they are not all expert level shooters, many who CC do put lots of time and effort into staying up on their shooting skills. You arguments sounds to me like saying that because we cannot do what is ideal we should not do anything at all....
I understand that we want to see a situation in which we have well trained defenders present. However, the government is unlikely to invest enough money for all schools to have well trained and equipped defense forces. While perhaps allowing teachers to carry means they are not all expert level shooters, many who CC do put lots of time and effort into staying up on their shooting skills. You arguments sounds to me like saying that because we cannot do what is ideal we should not do anything at all....
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/08/osha.guns/index.html
(UWIRE) -- Princeton University's policy of not allowing its officers to carry guns on campus doesn't hurt the officers' ability to do their jobs, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ruled.
etc.
---------------------------------------
Unleash the pepper spray like substance! Take that!
Probably Horseradish Mustard in a squeeze bottle.
(UWIRE) -- Princeton University's policy of not allowing its officers to carry guns on campus doesn't hurt the officers' ability to do their jobs, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ruled.
etc.
---------------------------------------
Unleash the pepper spray like substance! Take that!
Probably Horseradish Mustard in a squeeze bottle.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
