MO school teachers carrying...


Is that cost kinda high? I would think that what is essentially a civil servant (teacher) being trained by another civil servant, would not cause that kind of money transfer. Did, or could, they simply go through a standard police training course? Adding two people to a training course would not seem to incur that kind of cost. It really discourages schools with tight budgets (are there any other kind?) from training the whole staff. Perhaps some gun support organization could do this at a much lower cost as a contribution for making schools safer. And publicize it. Two people in a school is not a solution. All teachers should be required to take the training and carry; as a condition of employment. This could also reduce the crap going on in the schools about guns. Long term, we should get an "Introduction to Guns; Global History, 2A, REAL Statistics and Information.
 
Kind of like the $225 hammers the government buys even though a carpenter can go to Home Depot and get a nice one for $9.95.
 
$218.75 an hour per person - that's just crazy. PhD courses don't cost that much.


We would be asking school officials, trained as educators, to make a quick transition from teacher to SWAT member, arrive on the scene, assess the situation, overcome the severe nervousness that naturally accompanies a deadly force incident and take immediate action before blood is shed,” G.A. Buie, a Kansas high school principal and the president-elect of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, told the Star.
Thing is, when it's known that some faculty may be carrying in a school, the nutjobs they are defending against are going to be much less likely to ever show up.
 
It costs $17,500 for a district to have just 2 teachers receive 40 hours of training on the Glock 19 by law enforcement officers. Only the district and law enforcement knows who they are.

Link Removed

Music to my ears!

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=654077704679829&set=vb.111938618893743&type=2&theater

I find the price tag on this just outrageous. I am from OHIO and Buckeye Firearms Association offers a program to school personnel for active shooter response that seems a world away for this program.
~
I have linked a number of cites about the FASTER program offered by BFA and it appears they can provide a 3 day training through Tactical Defense Institute at a cost of $1000 for all expenses (training, ammo, room and board) which is a modest sum compared to $8750 per person in MO.
~
Tactical Defense Institute; Link Removed
~
Faculty / Administrator Safety Training & Emergency Response | Buckeye Firearms Association
~
Q&A on Armed Teacher Training Program | Buckeye Firearms Association
~
BTW, I neglected to state that BFA is providing this training at no charge to school personnel, it is being provided by the non profit organization for the betterment of the citizens of Ohio. So for those of you from Ohio if you are unaware or just haven't participated all are welcome. I have no direct connection to BFA other than a willing participant.
 
Last edited:
Usuary if you ask me. But when Gov't is involved, not unusual I suppose.

How is government involved? As I understand it, this training is provided by a privately owned business that happens to contract active duty LEOs to conduct the training.
 
How is government involved? As I understand it, this training is provided by a privately owned business that happens to contract active duty LEOs to conduct the training.

The more I look at this the fishier this looks.

The article says two 'staffers' get trained at a district - not teachers. The article mentions the Warsaw School District as one of the districts - I googled it and it includes: Warsaw High School, Warsaw John Boise Middle School, Warsaw North Elementary School, Warsaw Ruth Elementary, and Warsaw South Elementary School. So, from what I gather, for $17,500 2 'Staffers' get trained to basically police all 5 schools.

It would be more efficient to let teachers and school staff at the schools get CCW if they want for much less - it takes a $100 fee for 5 years and an 8 hour class.

The way the government is involved - I may be wrong but I see it as something like this: The governor or someone in the State office is probably friends with the owner of the co. that does the training. District Schools are public schools, so the tax payers pay for the training. And, after the co. gets paid, $17,500 the owner contributes maybe $5,000 to $7,500 to the politician's campaign fund. And then the politician finds some more high priced stuff for the co. to do. It's a vicious cycle. Politics been working pretty much like this ever since politicians became politicians.
 
The more I look at this the fishier this looks.

The article says two 'staffers' get trained at a district - not teachers. The article mentions the Warsaw School District as one of the districts - I googled it and it includes: Warsaw High School, Warsaw John Boise Middle School, Warsaw North Elementary School, Warsaw Ruth Elementary, and Warsaw South Elementary School. So, from what I gather, for $17,500 2 'Staffers' get trained to basically police all 5 schools from what I gather from it.

It would be more efficient to let teachers and school staff at the schools get CCW if they want for much less - it takes a $100 fee for 5 years and an 8 hour class.

The way the government is involved - I may be wrong but I see it as something like this: The governor or someone in the State office is probably friends with the owner of the co. that does the training. District Schools are public schools, so the tax payers pay for the training. And, after the co. gets paid, $17,500 the owner contributes maybe $5,000 to $7,500 to the politician's campaign fund. And then the politician finds some more high priced stuff for the co. to do. It's a vicious cycle. Politics been working pretty much like this ever since politicians became politicians.

Wow! Do you have a SINGLE SHRED of EVIDENCE to justify the accusation you are making here?
 
Wow! Do you have a SINGLE SHRED of EVIDENCE to justify the accusation you are making here?

Not sure which part you're asking about - if you read the article it says 2 staffers from a district get trained. And the Warsaw district is the one that it mentions of the 10 or so that have signed up so far. If you're asking about getting a ccw being $100 plus an 8 hour class, you can find that by googling Mo. ccw.

And, if you're talking about corruption in politics, I did say 'as I see it', but you might find this interesting (the last 2 paragraphs mentions supreme court and politics, the first few are definitions) :



"3. the policy in commercial dealings between countries by which corresponding advantages or privileges are granted by each country to the citizens of the other.
[1760–70; < Latin reciproc(us) (see reciprocal) + -ity]
Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.
Reciprocity
(See also COOPERATION.)

ka me, ka thee Do a good deed for another and the favor will be returned. This expression appeared in print as early as the mid-16th century. The exact origin is unknown and many variants were used interchangeably with ka, such as kaw, kae, k, kay, and kob. Scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours is a current analogous expression which like the proverbial Do unto others as you would have them do unto you implies reciprocity of service, flattery, or favors.

Ka me, ka thee, one good turn asketh another. (John Hey wood, Works, 1562)

logrolling The trading of votes or favors, especially among legislators, for mutual political gain; the policy of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.” In pioneer days a logrolling was a gathering at which neighbors helped each other roll and pile their logs to a particular spot for burning or other means of disposal. It was similar in nature to barn raisings and husking bees. Literal logrolling also played an important part in lumber camps where members of different camps often joined forces in rolling their logs to the water’s edge to catch the flood downstream. This U.S. term apparently came from the proverbial expression “you roll my log and I’ll roll yours.” Political use of the term dates from the early 19th century.

Territorial supreme courts have long since become known as a kind of log-rolling machine, in which the judges enter in the business of “you tickle me and I will tickle you.” (Weekly New Mexican Review, July, 1885)

one hand washes the other A proverbial expression originally denoting mutual cooperation in its positive sense only, but now carrying the negative connotations of backscratching, cronyism, and logrolling. It appeared as early as the 1500s in the former sense, but within a few centuries began to take on the latter dubious coloration."

BUT maybe you have a better explanation of why it should cost $17,500 to teach 2 people how to shoot a gun. :no:
 
Just to clarify it's the $17,500 fee to train 2 staffers that I'm saying I think sounds fishy. And I'm not accusing the governor - we had a superintendent of a small school district who got himself in hot water a year or so ago by voting himself a $300,000 plus fringe benefits salary while superintendents of larger districts were making about $60,000 - folks willing to take outrageous pay for what they do are all over the place.

By googling a bit, I found that a Florida firearms training school owner offered to teach teachers for free and said the 40 hour course would normally cost $900 (the Mo. class is also 40 hours).

An Ohio firearms school owner also offered to train teachers for free and had over 600 applicants at the time the article was written. -

I'm sure more can be found - I just took 15 minutes to skim those two articles.

600 teachers x $900 = $540,000 /////// 300 pair of teachers x $17,500 = $5,220,000

In essence, the Ohio guy donated over half a million dollars of training to teachers. In my opinion his heart is in the right place. The guy that's charging $17,500 for 2 students
to train is probably begging the person who writes his paycheck to find 600 teachers for him to train. I'm not sure where his heart is. And the person who decided that $17,500
is a reasonable fee to pay should have a talk with the firearms school owner in Florida who says the course would normally be $900. In my opinion the person writing that pay
check probably has his heart in a dark place too.

Fla. gun instructor says he'll train any teacher


Armed Teachers: Over 600 Have Applied for Training | Buckeye Firearms Association
 
My proof.. exactly. Why else?

Um, free market economy maybe? Charge what the market will bear? It's been known to happen. Jumping to payoffs and conspiracies is pretty unwarranted at this point.
 
Well, let's put it this way - the only kinds of people I know who would pay $8.750 for a 40 hour training class would be movie stars, maybe some wealthy CEO's and politicians. And politicians only because they can make taxpayers pay the bill.

Personally, I would fly to florida and give the guy $900 for the same training and spend the $7000 I had left staying at a nice resort on the beach for a month or so.

But, I'm sure Mo. wouldn't recognize the training 'cause they have super duper teachers who are worth that much more :no:
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,542
Messages
611,259
Members
74,964
Latest member
sigsag1
Back
Top