Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Saw this just now on Citizens, Not Subjects:
So I'm going to clear up some questions about "armed teachers".
1) Cost.
As it turns out, a WHOLE BUNCH of people would be willing to donate to defray those costs, privately, out of their own pockets. A whole bunch of people have directly offered to give away - completely for free - firearm safety and proficiency training, and assist teachers in getting their carry permits. Some people have offered to donate the firearms directly, in accordance with local laws on the manner in which this may be done.
2) Obligation.
There are apparently A METRIC FUCKTON of people who think that "We should ALLOW teachers to be armed" is the same thing as "We should COMPEL" teachers to be armed, and this is absolutely patently false. It's fucking moronic, in fact. NO ONE is going to MAKE a teacher carry, and I seriously question the reading comprehension of EVERY SINGLE PERSON who keeps bringing that bullshit up. THERE IS NO TEACHER IN THIS COUNTRY WHO WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO CARRY. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. STOP IT.
3) Safety.
I'm going to address a range of concerns here:
a) The kids might see/try to grab the gun! ..... Please go look up what CONCEALED carry means. There's absolutely NO ONE who should be able to tell if you are wearing your weapon; that's what concealed carry MEANS. If the kids don't know you have it, they aren't going to try to take it. If the kids don't know you have it, it isn't going to scare them or distract them.
b) BUT ONE TEACHER SHOT HERSELF IN THE LEG IN UTAH! ... Yeah. Four years ago. Injured herself only. No students harmed. Out of a period spanning a decade, out of literally HUNDREDS of teachers armed. So let's assume a low number of 100 teachers times ten years, divided by ONE negligent discharge that was non lethal and did not affect students... Yeah, I'mma call that "safe".
c) BUT WHAT ABOUT TEACHERS PULLING A GUN ON STUDENTS oh are you fucking kidding me? If you are afraid that your child's teacher is going to physically assault your child, or any child under his care, that person needs to be removed from teaching RIGHT GODDAMNED NOW, anyway. A gun will make no difference to that - that teacher is ALREADY a hazard. ... In point of fact, there's nothing except a big sign that says GUN FREE ZONE to prevent that teacher from bringing a gun to school to shoot the kids.
4) Scope.
Apparently a LOT OF PEOPLE think that "allowing teachers to be armed" means they're supposed to go all Stephen Seagal a la Under Siege. No. Stop. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. In point of fact, people who concealed carry will tell you that that is NOT IN THE SAFETY TRAINING, ANYWHERE, EVER. THAT IS NOT IN THE TRAINING. NO ONE IS GOING TO EXPECT THAT OF A PERSON WITH A CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT.
Y'all watch too many movies.
The teacher is expected to stay in lockdown with their students, and to be *prepared* to *defend his or her life, and his or her students* in the event an active shooter *comes into their classroom*.
That's. It. Anything more than that is unrealistic and expecting too much, and NO ONE IS CALLING FOR THAT. EVERYONE knows that would be a complete clusterfuck.
5) Race.
... This one's an issue. There's a lot of people being dismissive about black teachers being more at risk for carrying concealed legally in a school. I think there's a way to address that, with the school board having a record of who is carrying, and what their assigned classrooms are, and it should not be difficult to share that information with police as they are being dispatched. "Teachers in classrooms 1, 16, and 352 are legally carrying on school grounds. Follow procedure on announcing identity to avoid friendly fire."
Personally, I'm a lot more concerned about black teachers being harassed by cops on their way to and from their workplace, and for my more conservative friends who think this is "irrational liberal whining", I'm just gonna say Philandro Castille, you thick sons of bitches.
6) Liability
Good Samaritan laws should cover anything that happens during an active shooter lockdown. Since the firearm shouldn't be used for anything else, the teacher should be on their own for that one. And, since we have SEVEN STATES that allow teachers to carry concealed, we already HAVE actuarial tables, and data from which to draw.
EDITED TO ADD: 18 STATES ALLOW ADULTS TO CARRY ON SCHOOL GROUNDS, HERE IS THE LIST:
A 2013 NBC News investigation found:
Alabama (which bans possessing a weapon on school grounds only if the carrier has "intent to do bodily harm")
California (with approval of the superintendent)
Connecticut (with approval of "school officials")
Hawaii (no specific law)
Idaho (with school trustees' approval)
Iowa (with "authorization")
Kentucky (with school board approval)
Massachusetts (with approval of the school board or principal)
Mississippi (with school board approval)
Montana (with school trustees' permission)
New Hampshire (ban applies only to pupils, not adults)
New Jersey (with approval from the school's "governing officer")
New York (with the school's approval)
Oregon (with school board approval)
Rhode Island (with a state concealed weapons permit)
Texas (with the school's permission)
Utah (with approval of the "responsible school administrator")
Wyoming (as long as it's not concealed)
7) Personal Choice
I've seen one person bring up the question of whether or not a parent gets a say in whether or not their child can attend classes with an armed vs unarmed teacher. Since one of the primary tenets of carrying concealed at school is that no one really knows who is and is not carrying at school, no. The parents only choice is to lobby their local school district to enact their wishes. And some of you are not going to get your way. Which side winds up getting their way is going to vary widely by locale. If you don't like it, your option is basically to homeschool.
Now, did I miss anything? Not "am I wrong", I already know some of you think I'm a bloodthirsty maniac who wants piles of dead kids. Did I actually MISS any of the current arguments?
EDITED TO ADD (AND MORE WILL BE FORTHCOMING AS POINTS ARE RAISED):
8) Teachers are mentally unfit to defend their students.
I think this goes back to "permitted versus compelled", but okay, let's make the argument that teachers are somehow VASTLY DIFFERENT from the rest of the population at large, and ZERO PERCENT of them are fit, able, or qualified to deal with any life-threatening situation.
In which case, THEY WOULD NOT BE CARRYING A WEAPON.
Absolutely ANY TEACHER may CHOOSE to not carry a weapon if they feel remotely uncomfortable with it. The law would remain the same - any HYPOTHETICAL teachers who WANTED to carry concealed, but since they would all feel that they are mentally unfit, there would be zero armed teachers, thus negating the problem.
EDITED TO ADD:
9) "If we introduce a law which encourages or allows teachers to be armed I would imagine that the profession would all of a sudden attract a large number of applicants. However not for the reason which you might hope someone becomes a teacher in your local town. Not for the benefit and stimulation of young minds but instead as a result of far more cynical and somewhat disturbed motives. For example in the hope that they may be able to live out some sort of heroic powerful fantasy. I would suggest that anyone who might take up the job for such reasons do not suit the profession."
.... Wow. This is a new one I hadn't heard before.
Okay, generally those kinds of people don't apply to be teachers, they apply to be nurses, paramedics, cops, security guards, firemen, etc. You know, professions with an actual likelihood of dealing with a situation that calls for a hero.
I'm going to say that while this is an argument against arming teachers, it's an exceptionally groundless one.
2 Shares
So I'm going to clear up some questions about "armed teachers".
1) Cost.
As it turns out, a WHOLE BUNCH of people would be willing to donate to defray those costs, privately, out of their own pockets. A whole bunch of people have directly offered to give away - completely for free - firearm safety and proficiency training, and assist teachers in getting their carry permits. Some people have offered to donate the firearms directly, in accordance with local laws on the manner in which this may be done.
2) Obligation.
There are apparently A METRIC FUCKTON of people who think that "We should ALLOW teachers to be armed" is the same thing as "We should COMPEL" teachers to be armed, and this is absolutely patently false. It's fucking moronic, in fact. NO ONE is going to MAKE a teacher carry, and I seriously question the reading comprehension of EVERY SINGLE PERSON who keeps bringing that bullshit up. THERE IS NO TEACHER IN THIS COUNTRY WHO WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO CARRY. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. STOP IT.
3) Safety.
I'm going to address a range of concerns here:
a) The kids might see/try to grab the gun! ..... Please go look up what CONCEALED carry means. There's absolutely NO ONE who should be able to tell if you are wearing your weapon; that's what concealed carry MEANS. If the kids don't know you have it, they aren't going to try to take it. If the kids don't know you have it, it isn't going to scare them or distract them.
b) BUT ONE TEACHER SHOT HERSELF IN THE LEG IN UTAH! ... Yeah. Four years ago. Injured herself only. No students harmed. Out of a period spanning a decade, out of literally HUNDREDS of teachers armed. So let's assume a low number of 100 teachers times ten years, divided by ONE negligent discharge that was non lethal and did not affect students... Yeah, I'mma call that "safe".
c) BUT WHAT ABOUT TEACHERS PULLING A GUN ON STUDENTS oh are you fucking kidding me? If you are afraid that your child's teacher is going to physically assault your child, or any child under his care, that person needs to be removed from teaching RIGHT GODDAMNED NOW, anyway. A gun will make no difference to that - that teacher is ALREADY a hazard. ... In point of fact, there's nothing except a big sign that says GUN FREE ZONE to prevent that teacher from bringing a gun to school to shoot the kids.
4) Scope.
Apparently a LOT OF PEOPLE think that "allowing teachers to be armed" means they're supposed to go all Stephen Seagal a la Under Siege. No. Stop. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. In point of fact, people who concealed carry will tell you that that is NOT IN THE SAFETY TRAINING, ANYWHERE, EVER. THAT IS NOT IN THE TRAINING. NO ONE IS GOING TO EXPECT THAT OF A PERSON WITH A CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT.
Y'all watch too many movies.
The teacher is expected to stay in lockdown with their students, and to be *prepared* to *defend his or her life, and his or her students* in the event an active shooter *comes into their classroom*.
That's. It. Anything more than that is unrealistic and expecting too much, and NO ONE IS CALLING FOR THAT. EVERYONE knows that would be a complete clusterfuck.
5) Race.
... This one's an issue. There's a lot of people being dismissive about black teachers being more at risk for carrying concealed legally in a school. I think there's a way to address that, with the school board having a record of who is carrying, and what their assigned classrooms are, and it should not be difficult to share that information with police as they are being dispatched. "Teachers in classrooms 1, 16, and 352 are legally carrying on school grounds. Follow procedure on announcing identity to avoid friendly fire."
Personally, I'm a lot more concerned about black teachers being harassed by cops on their way to and from their workplace, and for my more conservative friends who think this is "irrational liberal whining", I'm just gonna say Philandro Castille, you thick sons of bitches.
6) Liability
Good Samaritan laws should cover anything that happens during an active shooter lockdown. Since the firearm shouldn't be used for anything else, the teacher should be on their own for that one. And, since we have SEVEN STATES that allow teachers to carry concealed, we already HAVE actuarial tables, and data from which to draw.
EDITED TO ADD: 18 STATES ALLOW ADULTS TO CARRY ON SCHOOL GROUNDS, HERE IS THE LIST:
A 2013 NBC News investigation found:
Alabama (which bans possessing a weapon on school grounds only if the carrier has "intent to do bodily harm")
California (with approval of the superintendent)
Connecticut (with approval of "school officials")
Hawaii (no specific law)
Idaho (with school trustees' approval)
Iowa (with "authorization")
Kentucky (with school board approval)
Massachusetts (with approval of the school board or principal)
Mississippi (with school board approval)
Montana (with school trustees' permission)
New Hampshire (ban applies only to pupils, not adults)
New Jersey (with approval from the school's "governing officer")
New York (with the school's approval)
Oregon (with school board approval)
Rhode Island (with a state concealed weapons permit)
Texas (with the school's permission)
Utah (with approval of the "responsible school administrator")
Wyoming (as long as it's not concealed)
7) Personal Choice
I've seen one person bring up the question of whether or not a parent gets a say in whether or not their child can attend classes with an armed vs unarmed teacher. Since one of the primary tenets of carrying concealed at school is that no one really knows who is and is not carrying at school, no. The parents only choice is to lobby their local school district to enact their wishes. And some of you are not going to get your way. Which side winds up getting their way is going to vary widely by locale. If you don't like it, your option is basically to homeschool.
Now, did I miss anything? Not "am I wrong", I already know some of you think I'm a bloodthirsty maniac who wants piles of dead kids. Did I actually MISS any of the current arguments?
EDITED TO ADD (AND MORE WILL BE FORTHCOMING AS POINTS ARE RAISED):
8) Teachers are mentally unfit to defend their students.
I think this goes back to "permitted versus compelled", but okay, let's make the argument that teachers are somehow VASTLY DIFFERENT from the rest of the population at large, and ZERO PERCENT of them are fit, able, or qualified to deal with any life-threatening situation.
In which case, THEY WOULD NOT BE CARRYING A WEAPON.
Absolutely ANY TEACHER may CHOOSE to not carry a weapon if they feel remotely uncomfortable with it. The law would remain the same - any HYPOTHETICAL teachers who WANTED to carry concealed, but since they would all feel that they are mentally unfit, there would be zero armed teachers, thus negating the problem.
EDITED TO ADD:
9) "If we introduce a law which encourages or allows teachers to be armed I would imagine that the profession would all of a sudden attract a large number of applicants. However not for the reason which you might hope someone becomes a teacher in your local town. Not for the benefit and stimulation of young minds but instead as a result of far more cynical and somewhat disturbed motives. For example in the hope that they may be able to live out some sort of heroic powerful fantasy. I would suggest that anyone who might take up the job for such reasons do not suit the profession."
.... Wow. This is a new one I hadn't heard before.
Okay, generally those kinds of people don't apply to be teachers, they apply to be nurses, paramedics, cops, security guards, firemen, etc. You know, professions with an actual likelihood of dealing with a situation that calls for a hero.
I'm going to say that while this is an argument against arming teachers, it's an exceptionally groundless one.
2 Shares
