Allow guns in school?

[Rocketgeezer]

I'm sitting right now about 20 minutes from your state line, and our respective states have a reciprocity agreement. There is no training requirement whatsoever here in Bama in order to get a permit. Does it "sadden" you that I can carry in your state too?

In another life long, long ago, I lived in WA State and got a permit with nothing more than a background check. No training required there either, and lots and lots of people carry in both WA and Bama, as well as the few states that allow constitutional carry (no permit, no training, no state-level government between the individual and his/her 2nd Amendment rights), yet crime is not inflated in these states over states with more restrictive training requirements, nor are accidental shootings or crimes of negligence/recklessness. Maybe most people in these states are getting their training the same way many/most of us did - from our parents, youth competition organizations, maybe even just from better-trained friends. And a lot of shooters like that probably augment their training on their own just like I did and several people I know in this area have done. Just because it's a wise thing to do doesn't make it the government's business to force on people.



I think it's much more stupid to give government more authority than the Constitution's authors and signers contemplated by writing that phrase, "...shall NOT be infringed" into the 2nd Amendment. Requirements that prevents one from exercising a right until they abide by them, whether they can afford those requirements or not, seems a rather obvious infringement to me.

We've thought seriously about moving to TN because land is pretty cheap in the southern part of the state, the country is gorgeous, no income tax, and it would be close enough that we could keep our same jobs in and near Huntsville, AL. One of the reasons we haven't made that move is because of the exorbitant expense of getting permitted up there. It costs each of us $15 bucks a year here. That's it. It's well over $250 up there counting the training course that neither of us needs. It's true that the $50 renewal every four years works out to a little cheaper than our $60 bucks every four years, but $500 or more just for both of us to get legal to begin with isn't real attractive.

Anyway, it kinda struck me weird to read that you think it's sad that some states don't require training. Unless you have some stats that suggest that causes more gun deaths and/or gun crime, all you're really sad about is that people in states like Alabama don't have more government in their lives. I'm here to tell you that that's one of the more important reasons I'm happy to be a Bama transplant!

Blues

I understand what your saying also I beleive GA doe's not have any training requierment, and who knows what others may not, Alaska, Vermont,.........but you are a little off on the permit cost's class's run anywhere from $40 to $85. and the state gets $115, and then the $50 every four years

 

[Timothy Bryant]

I'm certainly for allowing the teachers and executive staff at school to be armed at school but let's be honest - how many do you think would actually do so? Most of the teachers at my daughter's school certainly don't strike me as the pro second amendment type and it is a growing trend in schools nowadays to preach the evils of gun ownership. I find that it's usually the "educated" type of person who has a strong anti 2nd amendment stance. Do I mean to say that they are smarter than us? No. I just mean to say that they seem to believe themselves to be smarter than others. Most anti gunners I know like to use obscure words whenever presenting their point of view and it goes to show their attitude. If you are truly trying to convey your stance you should make it simply enough for the general public to read not word it like some Shakespearean play.

 

[bootsdeal]

If it ever happens, God forbid if the government controls it. It would be like arming the TSA agents and sending them from the airport security lines to the school halls. School protection should be up to each individual school district. It would take a whole new set of rules to figure out how to effectively train people for that job.

 

[BluesStringer]

I understand what your saying also I beleive GA doe's not have any training requierment, and who knows what others may not, Alaska, Vermont

I'm not sure you do understand what I'm saying. You just described my exact circumstances in reply to NavyLCDR and said, "...that's BS in anyones book." Or perhaps you understand, you just disagree that my state forcing less government on its citizens is a good thing? Yay government permissions to exercise your rights? Is that what you're saying?

.........but you are a little off on the permit cost's class's run anywhere from $40 to $85. and the state gets $115, and then the $50 every four years

You're off on the range of prices. We checked in Fayetteville and it was $125 each. Pulaski it was $120. Ardmore and Elkton don't have any state certified instructors, so if we want it cheaper than Fayetteville or Pulaski, we'd have to travel to Murfreesboro, Chattanooga, or maybe all the way to Nashville.

Whatever, even if it was only $20 bucks and within walking distance of wherever we bought our TN home, my rights come from God, not the federal government or the State of Tennessee. If I have to meet requirements to exercise those rights, they're not rights at all, they're permissions to engage in privileges that the state can deny just as easily as it can allow.

For the record, I feel as strongly about having to ask permission in the form of a carry permit here in Bama too, cheap and easy to get as it is. Please don't take this as a rant against TN. Really, it's not a rant at all. It's a statement of support for all Americans, teachers and administrators, even school janitors if that be the case, to enjoy the full breadth, width and depth of law that our Founders intended when they created the 2nd Amendment. Madison would've derisively scoffed at the notion that any free man should have to ask government for permission to carry and use the means to defend his life with, or the lives of those around him who might be defenseless against predators, victimizers, and mentally ill maniacs like the one in Newtown.

Blues

 

[NavyLCDR]

There are some states that do not requier any training or class instruction whatsoever, go to the Sherrif, pass a backround ck, pay your money and get your CCW permit...................that is BS in anyones book, being your so good with your computer looking up laws rules and regulations, you really should have known this, in my state we had to take 8hrs of classroom and firearms training to get our CCW certificate, and my wife and I have also take additional courses in home pertection and defence, I was not advocating that some need training and some don't, I have always said that any private citizen, non military, non police, who carrys a gun no matter who they are, needs to be trained, and this would go double for teachers, just because its your 2nd amendment right don't meen some should do it. I geuss in your veiw it was that kid in Newtown's 2nd ad right to carry guns, just because he was a american, and now we are seeing what that got us...........if someone dissagrees with this thats your choice.............

Just because it is my 2nd Amendment right means that I should be ALLOWED to do it, WITHOUT government intervention. Should we require training and a government permission slip to post on the internet? How about training and a government permission slip to go to church? How about a government background check and "good guy" card issued by the government required to fall under the protections of the 4th or 5th Amendment? And, of course, none of that would be free - you would have to pay anywhere from $35 to $300 to obtain your training and government permission slip to exercise your 1st or 4th or 5th amendment rights. That would be OK with you, right? WHY TREAT THE 2ND AMENDMENT DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS?

You know, just because YOU have the right to free speech granted under the 1st Amendment maybe does not mean that you should do it?

You say no training is B.S. in anyone's book. And yet you fail to be able to articulate any factual reason to indicate why. Again - show us the problems that exist in the states that don't require training.

 

[Aielman]

First, with school districts and police departments cutting staff and finances all across the country, just where do you expect to find the money to place an armed guard in every school?

I don't. We'd have to come up with the money from somewhere. I think with the national scare, we could find it somewhere. Maybe buy a few less condoms for college kids, or something

In 20 or so years of working for the government at some level, there is something that I have come to know is certain. There is money available for anything we really want to pay for, provided we really want it. A way can be found.

Second, a few armed staff and faculty here and there is better than what we have right now -- which is NO armed staff or faculty in most parts of the country.

Absolutely. I'm not saying we can't arm teachers either. I just don't think a great many, especially in the liberal enclaves of the northeast where they already don't carry much, are going to want to participate.

Link Removed by a guy who was in instructor in Utah for many years, and he did write about this very subject and describes his experiences teaching school staff and teachers how to carry. Even offered classes for free to them.

 

[dogshawred]

YES we are already too late.

The question is should guns be allowed in school, the answer is YES. How they get their is immaterial, that should be left up to the school. States need to alter their laws to allow the presence of legal guns in schools by authorized carries, PERIOD.

 

[hogwylde]

Harrold, Texas lets teachers carry concealed weapons

 

[Rhino]

There's no need to hire more police. I'd be willing to bet that 99% of schools in this country have teachers/staff who are gun enthusiasts and already own firearms and are familiar with their use. These people should be allowed to carry on school property and I'm sure they'd gladly do it. As long as these folks can pass a firearm safety course then they should come to work packing. School districts should also designate and handfull of teachers/staff at each school as "paid carriers" (as opposed to volunteers) and give them an extra $100 a month to cover the costs of going to the range on a regular basis. A small price to pay.....

My wife already has her carry license and is more than willing to carry in her elementary school. She'd be happy to take extra training too. We were planning to do that anyway.
.

The difference in the equation is what I could find worrisome. Due to their mandatory service requirements, Israelis are very familiar with all aspects of firearms. That includes the mental aspects of having to defend yourself and others. I am in agreement with arming some teachers, ones that are VERY familiar and comfortable with firearms, and with the mindset to be able to actually have to use one. And I don't mean just a little weekend course of some kind. Shooting in defense is not something most minds are programed to do if you aren't somewhat comfortable in that situation. Freezing, hesitating and letting yourself question taking the necessary action, getting it taken away from you, or just not being alert, could lead to some terrible consequences.
As I stated, I'm all for giving teachers the right and the means to protect themselves and our children....but just please be careful with who it is that would be given this responsibility.

If you don't want people carrying without those qualifications, then why do you support concealed carry? I know of no state that requires those things. I'm assuming you have a carry license and you probably didn't have those qualifications when you got it. Did you refuse to carry until you got those qualifications? Are you championing legislation to require people to meet those qualifications before being allowed to carry concealed firearms? If not, then why? You obviously think that people without those qualifications are dangerous, so why are you not fighting to deny them the right to carry? It can't be because they're around children because people carry around children every day on the streets, in parks, in stores, and just about everywhere else you can think of. That's what I've been trying to get across. Extra training is great. I'm all for it. But denying teachers the right to carry based on extra qualifications that the rest of us don't have to meet would make us incredible hypocrites and would put us firmly in the same category of the anti-gunners who want to take our rights away while preserving those same rights for elitists.
.

Don't get your undies all bunched up Rhino! I did expect more of you.

LOL! You've grossly misinterpreted me if you think that got me riled up. I was the one who was disappointed.
.

You, me and the rest of LTC crowd are only to carry primarily for 1) Self defense and defense of loved ones. Yes there are other extenuating circumstances.
A volunteer teacher or admin whose purpose is primarily the protection of a number of innocent children during an active shooter situation or being able to detect with certainty and stop a potential mass shooter is a bit different. Wouldn't you agree?

No. That might make sense if you leaned more toward the narcissistic end of the spectrum rather than toward the selfless end, but I don't lean that way. I've always leaned toward the selfless end. I swore an oath during my military career that I would give up my life for the sake of others. I may not be in the military anymore, but I still very much believe in that principle, and I'm hardly alone. Most teachers are the selfless type. Why else would they do what they do for the pay they're given? So no, the preservation instinct isn't going to be all that different for teachers and their students, and the events in Newtown demonstrated that even when the teachers were completely unarmed. My wife would lay down her life for her students if necessary, and she's hardly unique in that sentiment.
.

Now looking at it that way don't you think with such a tremendous responsibility that everyone involved, especially the volunteer would welcome some intense situational training. Do you think it is something that because you and others can carry without such training it shouldn't be expected of such a volunteer. If that is your attitude then I am sure with that outlook during your interview as a possible volunteer I am positive it would show and you would be rejected outright.

I never said I was against training. On the contrary, I'm all for it. What I said was that it's hypocritycal to deny teachers the right to concealed carry based on requirements that other concealed carriers don't have to meet.
.

Think about it. Un-bunch your undies and aim first and then shoot. I mean think first then type! To take your assertion to the extreme one would have to say that just having your LTC makes you a great shot and a tactical genius.

LOL! You're the one using the same argument that the anti-gunners use and you think I'm the one who needs to think before typing? That's a riot! Link Removed

 

[jameshd]

IL don't think it would cost a cent to have armed security at our schools. I know there is at least one person in this town, a veteran, retired, trained and licensed to carry concealed, who would volunteer to provide this security. I am also sure that there are several others in town who would do the same thing. There are undoubtedly others across the nation who would do so, at minimal (probably no) cost to the school system.

 

[tattedupboy]

We'll never have it here. The liability risk is too great. The fear of getting sued in a country as lawsuit-happy as the United States is a bigger influence on behavior than just about anything else.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[Rhino]

We'll never have it here. The liability risk is too great. The fear of getting sued in a country as lawsuit-happy as the United States is a bigger influence on behavior than just about anything else.

The liability issues can be dealt with legislatively.

 

[tattedupboy]

The liability issues can be dealt with legislatively.

You're right, it can be. Antis would then take to the courts to try to have them repealed judicially. Don't ever underestimate them.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[Rhino]

I never underestimate them.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

In nature, when two males fight( lions for example) it is usually to establish dominance. When the challenger has been beaten and relents, the fight is over and the two go about their business.

Actually, Male Lions will and do fight to the death during mating season!

Just thought you should know!

 

[BluesStringer]

We'll never have it here. The liability risk is too great. The fear of getting sued in a country as lawsuit-happy as the United States is a bigger influence on behavior than just about anything else.

What amount of liability might the town of Newtown and/or the State of Connecticut be facing right now? And even if they're immune legally-speaking, public opinion should never give them immunity. If Newtown's school board and other governing bodies kneel in servitude to the federal mandate that schools be gun free zones, then vote them out and vote in officials who will stand up for children and stand up against predators, whether they be predators gunning down the children, or predators stripping the rights and sovereignty of states away at the federal level.

There's a liability cost to be paid by those who are capable of standing up against evil, but who instead calculate their own earthly financial well-being as the controlling factor in deciding to do nothing. If I ever have to face a judge for taking action to stop evil in its tracks when I was there and capable of doing so, I'll accept that judge's ruling on what I owe knowing full well that the Final Judge of my actions on Earth will reward me greatly for the same incident. The liability of inaction is what should be considered first and foremost.

Blues

 

[Jay]

As posted, the liability issue can be dealt with legislatively... as it has in Indiana. Indiana's code can easily be expanded to hold schools not liable in cases of actions to protect students....

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana:

SECTION 1. IC 35-41-3-2 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2006]:
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; only and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, or curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.
(c) With respect to property other than a dwelling, or curtilage, or an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable force against another person if the person reasonably believes that the
force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect. However, a person:
(1) is not justified in using deadly force; unless and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
only if that force is justified under subsection (a).

 

[Rocketgeezer]

We'll never have it here. The liability risk is too great. The fear of getting sued in a country as lawsuit-happy as the United States is a bigger influence on behavior than just about anything else.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Unfortunatly your probably right. and I dont see a anybody with power taking up the cause, as the what ifs are endless, ...........the school and other shootings are very unfortunate things to happen. but untill this country comes to admit that a part of its population is not all there, and comes up with ways of dealing with it, stuff like this will happen. also if you just take away one tool (guns) those people will find another, car, bat, 2x4, knife, Bomb, poison, bow&arrow, and for the truely dedicated, the list could go on forever, and the smarter and more inventive they happen to be the longer the list, some of the x military may know, but the government teach's our special forces a lot, that the general public doe's not want to know about..............and personaly on the subject of arming teachers I am for it 1000%, with proper training and IF the teacher was more than willing............

 

[UKCatFan012]

I taught high school for 27 years and I knew of only one instance where a teacher carried a gun to school. A lady I taught with carried a .38 snub nose revolver in her purse at all times. Her uysband owned a small gun store in town and after school each day, she went to work at the store and served as bookkeeper. She had to make the night deposit for the store and on two occasions within 6 months of beginning to do so, she was robbed at the bamk's night depository, and the second time she was severly beaten by the robber. After the second incident, she got her CCL and began to carry full time. She left her purse in our department break room one morning and I just happened to notice the snubbie in her purse. I didn't say anything to her, but I guess she assumed that I had seen the pistol and she ask that I not mention it to anyone. I said "What pistol?"
Three years after she retired from teaching, the Central Office staff found out that she had been carrying a gun to school and went ape s*it crazy about it. One morning before school, the Assistant Superintendent came into our building with two City Police Officers and called all the faculty down to the Library, where she proceeded to tell all of the teachers that we were going to be searched for weapons by the Police Officers. I got the floor and told her that I would decline her offer, to which she then got in my face and said that I could either be searched or be fired. I asked her if she was going to be included in the search, and she rudely said no, she wasn't going to be searched. I then told her that I would agree to be searched if I could then in return search her. That drew a chorus of laughs from the rest of the teachers, and more than several male teachers volenteered to help me.
She then stormed out of the library and called the Superintendent, who came to the school and also got up in my face. He proceeded to tell me that if he could prove that I had prior knowledge about the retired teached carrying a firearm onto school property, he would see to it that I was fired and then took to court as a co-conspirator. After I told him that he had better get out of my face (he was related to me), I told him to have at, but that he could expect me to file a lawsuit as well against him and the school baord. The search of the teachers was dropped, but they did have the Police interview the retired teacher who stated that to her knowledge, I did not know about her carrying a concealed weapon onto school property. After this episode, when ever the hair-brained Assistant Superintendent came into the building while I was there, I suddenly had to go to the restroom, where I stayed until she left the building.
The two high schools and middle schools here have had an armed Police Officer that split time between one high school and one middle school since 1997. When that policy was adopted by our school board, violence in the four schools dropped by about 99.9%. Noone has attempted to go in and try to pull off a mass schooting in any of the schools in the county either.
Link Removed

 

[Captain K-man]

All this uproar over the NRA suggesting "armed guards" at schools..... So what are school resource officers? Cops in the high schools and some middle schools. They interact and educate the kids at the same time providing safety..... Guess what they carry a gun in school.