M14 Forum banner
21 - 40 of 113 Posts

Registered
Joined
1,756 Posts
Just to zoom out a bit:

Consistent once again with the prevailing sentiment of gun owners (I think or hope), the goal here is to not issue pistols to every teacher. It is to encourage responsible gun ownership and for those holding a weapon that can exact deadly force to take the burden of responsibility seriously. That means training and mental and technical discipline.
 

Registered
Joined
118 Posts
Just to zoom out a bit:

Consistent once again with the prevailing sentiment of gun owners (I think or hope), the goal here is to not issue pistols to every teacher. It is to encourage responsible gun ownership and for those holding a weapon that can exact deadly force to take the burden of responsibility seriously. That means training and mental and technical discipline.
Who gets to define responsible? 馃え
 

Registered
No Fly List
Joined
1,166 Posts
Well Random Guy I'd rather have a untrained teacher with a .380 pocket pistol for defense of my grandkids than someone throwing books at a bad guy.

The problem with this new law is it's up to the local Board of Education instead of the individual staff members. The rural schools will be armed but the lib-tards in the city's won't allow it.
Just my 2垄
 

Registered
Joined
3,119 Posts
I'm afraid that it takes more than an armed teacher to stop a suicidal/homicidal mass shooter armed with an AR-15 type weapon and anywhere from 30 to 210 rounds of ammo in a school building. In reality, it takes a heavily armed 6-man SWAT team with ballistic shields, proper tactical weapons that are not typically concealable, and a ton of specialized training to really neutralize a suicidal/homicidal mass shooter like what see here in the USA. I think we have 97k public schools, so multiple that by 6 and and that's 600k full-time SWAT police for just public schools, along with need to train as a team every month or two to keep the their skills up - preferably at the specific school that is funding their protection.

Hence, even if we raised local taxes to pay for such a force, I don't think we can effectively harden our schools with such a massive police/SWAT force. Not sure how kids and parents would feel seeing 6 people decked out in full tactical gear at the entry points. It's more effective (and cheaper) to do a couple of character/reference checks for young males buying their first firearm that trying to train teachers and create a police state for public schools...Once they have the firearms, ammo, and homicidal/suicidal intent, its basically too late. My 2cts.
View attachment 482628
RG, you are correct that responding to an active shooter is best performed by a SWAT team. However, I prefer to meet the threat through effective perimeter security. I consider having to assault an active shooter within a school building to be the last resort. It still needs to be an option but it shouldn't be the first option.

Schools need effective perimeter security and the school in Uvalde was an example of a school with poor perimeter security. The killer entered through a secondary door that was left open and there wasn't a security officer even within the school at the time. There needs to be only one entrance and it needs to be covered by an armed officer. All secondary emergency doors need to be electronically monitored so, if they are opened, there is an alarm sounded.
 

Registered
Joined
1,498 Posts
I am afraid that while a trained SWAT team is strategizing, a qualified teacher, already on the scene, should be able to neutralize some meathead with a gun. One resident immediately beats the hell out of 6 an hour late to the show.
No amount of LEO training can trump an individual with an adrenaline rush defending his or her students. People need to be able to take care of business. Police are not there to " protect" anyone if they are outside hiding behind an armored vehicle. Truth is, it is an individual's responsibility to protect them and theirs in most situations.
Yup. Think about any of the shootings. If even one person could have returned fire to disrupt the assailant how many lives would have been saved. Fighting a rifle with a handgun is not good but it beats nothing. Here in Utah teachers have always been able to carry with the Utah concealed permit. We are now a Constitutional Carry state but they still need the permit to carry in schools. At one time we talked about a program to arm, train, and supply teachers. I hope they get to it again.

Nice post nf1e.
 

Premium Member
Joined
21,152 Posts
Think! I will bet there are thousands of " qualified " gun totting teachers already waiting to be allowed the defense of their kids. It's some of the dang stupid gun free zones and other laws that are keeping them from doing what comes naturally.
 

Registered
Joined
1,498 Posts
Who gets to define responsible? 馃え
Who gets to define responsible now? This must be a personal choice by the teachers. Choosing to carry deadly force is a big deal. Now, do they all need to carry? No, just the ones that want to carry. If that ends up being all of them then so be it. The key is that if at least some are carrying the bad guys will know that and that alone will be somewhat of a deterrent. These cowards do not want a fight they want gun free zones with victims. Also, they will not have a clue as to who to shoot first if some of the teachers are carrying. My son is a high school teacher. He believes that in Utah at least two or three guns are at his high school every day.

Don't get me wrong. I still want that SWAT team or any other LEO responding ASAP.

This is real world. This is at least a start to the solution. We also need more secure buildings.
 

Banned
Joined
61 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 ·
I am afraid that while a trained SWAT team is strategizing, a qualified teacher, already on the scene, should be able to neutralize some meathead with a gun. One resident immediately beats the hell out of 6 an hour late to the show.
No amount of LEO training can trump an individual with an adrenaline rush defending his or her students. People need to be able to take care of business. Police are not there to " protect" anyone if they are outside hiding behind an armored vehicle. Truth is, it is an individual's responsibility to protect them and theirs in most situations.
True. Nice idea man
Every individual needs to be ready to protect themselves at some point.
Like my old man used to say "sometimes if you want something done, you have to do it yourself".
 

Premium Member
Joined
21,152 Posts
Thank you Sir.
Yup. Think about any of the shootings. If even one person could have returned fire to disrupt the assailant how many lives would have been saved. Fighting a rifle with a handgun is not good but it beats nothing. Here in Utah teachers have always been able to carry with the Utah concealed permit. We are now a Constitutional Carry state but they still need the permit to carry in schools. At one time we talked about a program to arm, train, and supply teachers. I hope they get to it again.

Nice post nf1e.
We could also equip teachers, that wish, with good quality immobilizing pepper spray. For decades now I have had security customers ask what is the best firearm for them to purchase for home defense. For 90% of them my suggestion has been to forget firearms altogether and get some good spray. That way if you are afraid to use it and the bad guy takes if from you , at least you won't be shot with you own gun.
No degree of training can prepare everyone for every situation that might arise.
Good example recently was the fandango in Texas. Was it active shooter , hostage situation or some other? Going by a book of training almost never works out to the advantage of folks except for legal liability after the fact.
Even our military has been training for the last war for 100 years or more. Hence , we are never prepared for every situation.
 

Registered
Joined
1,664 Posts
What do you think about this new law approved by Gov. Mike DeWine on Monday.
Right or Wrong!?
Is that the entirety of Ohio? Or...just Columbus or Cleveland? The teachers there should be armed...not against wannabe mass-shooters.. but probably against their students. Chicago should adopt the same - southside especially. Gunfire in these areas are normal everyday occurences. All you gotta do is look up the yearly tally -
 

Registered
Joined
4,705 Posts
I think the point I was trying to make is that it is better to be pro-active rather than re-active when it comes to this topic. Arming teachers and hardening schools with SWAT teams is re-active, and extraordinary complex and expensive, and perhaps not even effective against a determined mass shooter who is fully suicidal/homicidal...

Keeping the weapons out of the hands of the teenage/20 something year-old whack-jobs in the first place is pro-active. I see the problem as too many mentally disturbed young males (aka whack-jobs) legally buying weapons with the specific intent to go out on a suicidal/homicidal killing rampage. They just don't yet have a criminal record, so NICS doesn't flag them as someone unsuitable for firearm ownership.

My observation? Not all of them, but the typical 18-25 year old mass shooter is a disturbed male who would typically not be able to provide three personal character references for a basic background check inquiring about their suitability for firearm ownership - as the majority of mass shooters have parents/siblings/class-mates and co-workers - who if asked the basic question by an unbiased investigator; "Do you have any reservations about this applicant having access or ownership of a firearm?" Those who know the disturbed male (and esp if they cared about that person) would respond with a "Yes, to be honest I do have reservations about that person for the following reasons...."

IMO, if 2 out of 3 people interviewed relate similar risks about that applicant, suggesting that access to firearms might be a risk to that person's life, or to the life of others, those character references should be taken into account prior to a first-time firearm purchase. If all three references check-out fine, then the purchase should then proceed. This basic character reference check would create a slight delay for first-time buyers, but it is doable.

The signs of violent intent/pathological anger are almost always observed by those who know the mass shooter, but those folks are only interviewed by law enforcement or the media after the tragedy has already occurred. As I have noted before, the current NICS background check isn't working to screen out the whack-jobs, and as a consequence we have a lot of tragedies carried out by homicidal/ suicidal mass shooters. Those tragedies are impacting gun ownership rights for the normal folks.

If we have to provide a few references to get an entry level job, then I think we should consider asking for a few character references for 18-25 year-olds who are seeking to purchase their first firearm. A lack of a criminal record doesn't mean that someone is responsible enough or mentally fit for the awesome responsibility of firearm ownership. Would such a process screen-out 100% of the whack-jobs and want-to-be mass shooters? Probably not, but it would likely screen out most of them. I think this is far cheaper and more effective than trying to harden 100k schools, and in the end I think it would/could enhance gun owner rights.

IMO, the founding fathers were brilliant men, but if they could see into future, they might have added two simple but powerful words to the following text that I think is a reasonable/ logical edit:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of sound minded people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I think we can agree that sound-minded people are NOT suicidal/homicidal mass shooters who are typically known to be disturbed males by family members/classmates/co-workers. Hence my post regarding a more pro-active approach to partially solve this issue with a compromise that I think preserves the intent of the right, as opposed to various re-active approaches that don't address what is often the core problem: An insufficient vetting process that appears somewhat specific to the USA. Moving on...but those are my 2cts.
 

Registered
Joined
624 Posts
So how many States now allow trained personnel who volunteer to be armed with a concealed carry pistol in schools? I know Ohio and Utah allow it.
 

Registered
Joined
118 Posts
It鈥檚 like that allegory about the bowl of peanuts. One of them is poisoned, but you can have all you want. Generally at the end of the day the bowl is still full.

You don鈥檛 have to arm every teacher, just make sure that the willing are trained and unobstructed. Small unit tactics would be ideal. Give them qualified immunity like the cops and shout it from the rooftops. Anyone shows up being stoopit burn them to the ground and hang what鈥檚 left on the front gate.
 

Registered
Joined
118 Posts
I think the point I was trying to make is that it is better to be pro-active rather than re-active when it comes to this topic.
Arming teachers and hardening schools is re-active, and extraordinary complex and expensive, and perhaps not even effective against a determined mass shooter who is fully suicidal/homicidal...

Keeping the weapons out of the hands of the whack-jobs in the first place is pro-active. I see the problem as too many young male whack-jobs legally buying weapons with the specific intent to go out on a suicidal/homicidal killing rampage. They just don't yet have a criminal record, so NCIS doesn't flag them as someone unsuitable for firearm owernship.

My observation? Not all of them, but the typical 18-25 year old mass shooter is a disturbed male who would typically not be able to provide three personal character references for a basic background check - as the majority of mass shooters have parents/siblings/class-mates and co-workers - who if asked the basic question by an unbiased investigator; "Do you have any reservations about this applicant having access or ownership of a firearm?" Those who know the disturbed male would respond with a "Yes, I do have reservations about that person for the following reasons...."

The signs are almost always there for those who know the mass shooter, but those folks are only interviewed by law enforcement or the media after the tragedy has already occurred. As I have noted before, the current NCIS background check isn't working to screen out the whack-jobs, and as a consequence we have a lot of tragedies carried out by homicidal/suicidal mass shooters. Those tragedies are impacting gun ownership rights for the normal folks.

If we have to provide a few references to get an entry level job, then I think we should consider asking for a few character references for 18-25 year-olds who are seeking to purchase their first firearm. A lack of a criminal record doesn't mean that someone is responsible enough or mentally fit for the awesome responsibility of firearm ownership. Would such a process screen out all the whack-jobs and want-to-be mass shooters? Probably not, but it would likely screen out most of them. I think this is far cheaper and more effective than trying to harden 100k schools, and in the end I think it would/could enhance gun owner rights. My 2cts.
That kind of proactivity starts stepping on my johnson and I don鈥檛 like having my johnson stepped on.

Funny how every one of the recent shooters have been on the Feebs radar. Perhaps instead of fouling my sandbox there should be a deep dive into some fed agencies by folks twice removed. 馃
 

Banned
Joined
61 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
Is that the entirety of Ohio? Or...just Columbus or Cleveland? The teachers there should be armed...not against wannabe mass-shooters.. but probably against their students. Chicago should adopt the same - southside especially. Gunfire in these areas are normal everyday occurences. All you gotta do is look up the yearly tally -
I think it鈥檚 the entire Ohio.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Registered
Joined
1,664 Posts
I think arming teachers is a cop-out way to deal w/ a potentially bad situation. I would not ask a school teacher to deal w/ a life or death situation on same level as cops. What if you have a hostage situation - should we expect a school teacher to take a shot and risk killing the hostage? WE do NOT even ask that for cops. We bring in the SWAT for those.

If the teachers want to pack heat - by all means. But one thing they should remember is that YOU are responsible for every round. If you shoot and kill a student, or civilian bystander, or neighbor a distance away coz your round flew over the perp's head...is ON YOU!

That is like asking untrained civillians to take take point on a police or military operation to deal w/ dangerous combatants...while the real cavalry is right behind? And let us not forget - many of these teachers are bleeding-heart liberals.

Just harden the schools and have armed police at the facility. But of course them liberals want to defund the police...so there ya go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danny L. Ables

Registered
Joined
1,006 Posts
I'm afraid that it takes more than an armed teacher to stop a suicidal/homicidal mass shooter armed with an AR-15 type weapon and anywhere from 30 to 210 rounds of ammo in a school building. In reality, it takes a heavily armed 6-man SWAT team with ballistic shields, proper tactical weapons that are not typically concealable, and a ton of specialized training to really neutralize a suicidal/homicidal mass shooter like what see here in the USA. I think we have 97k public schools, so multiple that by 6 and and that's 600k full-time SWAT police for just public schools, along with need to train as a team every month or two to keep the their skills up - preferably at the specific school that is funding their protection.

Hence, even if we raised local taxes to pay for such a force, I don't think we can effectively harden our schools with such a massive police/SWAT force. Not sure how kids and parents would feel seeing 6 people decked out in full tactical gear at the entry points. It's more effective (and cheaper) to do a couple of character/reference checks for young males buying their first firearm that trying to train teachers and create a police state for public schools...Once the disturbed person has the firearms, ammo, and homicidal/suicidal intent, its basically too late. My 2cts.
View attachment 482628
I disagree somewhat. Many potential mass shooters have been stopped by concealed carriers. It may be an unequal fight, but a properly prepared citizen has a few things going for them.
1. Many mass shooters are cowards. They want to vent their demonic rage and become famous. They are not interested in an actual gun fight. This is why they target gun free zones. They want to tally a huge body count. Most then want to commit suicide cleanly and spare themselves any physical pain. The worst fear of many is going to prison for their crime.
2. Many mass shooters are not really trained. Some learn just enough about their guns to hit targets at close range. One or two didn't even know how to clear a jam and threw their rifles away when a simple clearance drill would have put it back in action.
3. An AR-15 does not make a coward or a person with low skill into a super man. I wouldn't want to face one with my pistol, but it's not impossible odds either. Inside of a school, an AR-15 has no range or accuracy advantage in most situations.
4. Some have begun mass shootings and then either run or surrendered when somebody returned fire.
5. The concealed carrier has the element of surprise.
6. The armed teachers have the advantage of immediacy over any tactical response force. They are there when it begins. Their lives, and the lives of the kids they care about, are on the line.
7. Just the threat of an armed response will cause some shooters to pick a different target. Not to make light of a grim topic, but there are still plenty of gun-free theaters and bars around, depending on your state's laws.

I completely agree with you that our society needs to do a better job of addressing the mental health crisis and the sort of alienation that fills some young men with rage. But I have long thought that school staff should be able to be armed if they want to be. Every citizen should have the right to defend themselves and others, regardless of where they work. I support training and screening. I just think we keep repeating this experiment of gun-free schools and getting the same result, and I'm tired of it. It's one of many reasons we home school our kids.
 

Registered
Joined
1,498 Posts
Armed teachers is not re-active it is a pro-active preparatory move. So is more secure buildings where the shooter cannot shot his way in. Trying to ban guns from potential shooters will make you feel good for a day or two until you realize that they can easily steal a gun or get it from the black market. More gun laws are futile attempts to show action that do nothing for the real problem.

In all shooting situations what ended up stopping the threat? A gun.
 

Registered
Joined
58 Posts
The new Ohio law is not quite what has been given here. The new law ALLOWS each school district to decide if they will have Armed Volunteer Security Teams for their schools. Nothing REQUIRES the school districts to do so. Also, it is not up to each individual teacher whether they will be armed, it will be up to the LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT. The new law will require a minimum of 24 hours of initial training (the intent if the law but not as it was written) of a curriculum that is approved by a designated State entity and a minimum of 8 hours each year refresher. One critical piece of training that is supposed to be included is first aid for all types of Traumatic injuries. This alone can make a huge impact in the survivability of any type critical incident until professionals can get on the scene.
(The new law is already probably going to have to be rewritten to correct some VERY poorly written language on the initial training hours requirement. This is incredibly common when legislation is written in Ohio for some unfathomable reason). I believe the new law also sets up and provides funds, to have trained/certified personnels make security assessments of each school building in the state IF requested.
 
21 - 40 of 113 Posts
Top