E
ezkl2230
Guest
I still like the approach of Barry Township (MI) Police Chief Victor Pierce - with the Delton Kellogg school district's blessing, he is training teachers/administrators to be reserve police officers. The school is essentially their patrol area, and they will, as deputized reserve officers, be able to carry their firearms on school property. Teachers chosen by the district for this must go through a 12 week training course, and the firearm they carry will be issued by the department. Their status as reserve officers enables them to carry anywhere.
I like it! It answers nearly all of the concerns and costs the school district very little, if anything, from what I have been able to see.
Delton starts training teachers as reserve officers
longslide10
New member
That's about the truth of it eh? We're all living in commie occupied territory and yet here we all sit perplexed on what to do
superprincess
New member
If the teacher is qualified and experienced with a firearm, I see no problem allowing them to carry on school grounds to protect themselves and the students. For instance the teacher (marine veteran) we know he was more than qualified. Not so sure if he would have shot a 12 or 13 year old student. My opinion let the schools decide if they wish to allow teachers to carry.
If not then a top-notch security plan needs to be in effect. Everyone has the right to feel safe at work, this includes all school employees.
rogrrr
New member
Some of you say that it is unsafe to carry with one in the chamber. Some say that no gun should be in a classroom. Some feel at ease carrying.
Doc claims that an armed teacher will increase the cost of education. If the teacher chooses to carry his/her gun, he will carry what he owns and is comfortable shooting. It won't cost you a cent.
Getting back to safely chambered/unchambered arms - I've carried 1911s for years and they have ALWAYS been condition 1 - chambered/hammer COCKED (that's how it was designed to be carried). Never had one go off. Even if the safety is inadvertently moved off, the gun is still safe bcuz it has a grip safety and your finger should NOT BE ON THE TRIGGER until you are pointing at the target.
Speaking of "LOST" weapons - there is a very simple solution to that - DON'T TAKE IT OUT OF THE HOLSTER ! It won't get lost. I never EVER take my gun out of the holster unless I'm GOING TO SHOOT IT ! I get home and remove the holster with the gun in it but in public, it's always safely holstered and concealed. No chance of getting lost.
Put your glock on the table next to my 1911. Bring your 5 year old into the room and let him"play" with the guns on the table. Which one is more likely to be discharged by him ?
Now look at how the Israelis arm all their teachers. How many killings and/or accidental discharges do you hear of from there ?
Doc claims that an armed teacher will increase the cost of education. If the teacher chooses to carry his/her gun, he will carry what he owns and is comfortable shooting. It won't cost you a cent.
Getting back to safely chambered/unchambered arms - I've carried 1911s for years and they have ALWAYS been condition 1 - chambered/hammer COCKED (that's how it was designed to be carried). Never had one go off. Even if the safety is inadvertently moved off, the gun is still safe bcuz it has a grip safety and your finger should NOT BE ON THE TRIGGER until you are pointing at the target.
Speaking of "LOST" weapons - there is a very simple solution to that - DON'T TAKE IT OUT OF THE HOLSTER ! It won't get lost. I never EVER take my gun out of the holster unless I'm GOING TO SHOOT IT ! I get home and remove the holster with the gun in it but in public, it's always safely holstered and concealed. No chance of getting lost.
Put your glock on the table next to my 1911. Bring your 5 year old into the room and let him"play" with the guns on the table. Which one is more likely to be discharged by him ?
Now look at how the Israelis arm all their teachers. How many killings and/or accidental discharges do you hear of from there ?
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
It shouldn't be up to anyone other than the individual who gets to decide whether or not they will carry. Sure we have the Right to FEEL safe, but it's impossible to actually BE safe. Disarming teachers and telling them to rely on someone else just to make them FEEL safe is illogical and immoral when we all ready know it's that individuals responsibility to protect themselves.
wolf_fire
New member
I am a teacher. I am also a trained Deputy in our Sheriff's department. Because of governmental BS, I am mandated to be a sheep in my classroom in charge of all the other sheep who will get slaughtered because I cannot carry a firearm to protect them from the deadly BG that may come into our school. I carry one in the chamber and carry in a retention holster. No student would ever be able to get my firearm off me, even if they knew I was carrying. However, until the laws and policies change, currently, I am a sitting duck who gets to bring his school issued scissors to a gun fight.
wolf_fire
New member
I don't agree with tax payers funding it. There are many teachers if their school mandated a certain training program would do it on their own dime.
superprincess
New member
I totally agree with you, Can someone decide for you? No they cannot decide for you or anyone else. If schools were granted permission to allow employees to protect themselves and others then life could go like this. If school A decides, everyone is going to be sitting ducks in the classroom. In an unsecure building with no alarm system, no security and no locks on the doors of each classroom. Then in my opinion you have no obligation to stay there. You can pack up and move to school B or C which has all or at least most of these security measures in place. Hey most of American households have locks on doors and bedroom doors, some even have in-home security systems such as ADT or CPI. Imo if parents wish to keep their children safe, they could all pay a percentage for the security at these public schools. Here is an example, Like I told the HOA manager I didn't wish to help pay for an off-duty policemen's salary of $41,000 a year to patrol the neighborhood where I live. Because I purchased my own security last year. Of course he starting quoting a statute. This example is to show you parents collectively could pay for a security system, doors with locks and police protection, or whatever it takes. After all parents these are your children, you are ultimately responsible for whatever happens to them. For the responsible parents who do provide security at home for your families. Be responsible parents and provide security for your children at school. Why do you think we have a school board? Take your suggestions there and see what the initial response will be. IMO if they can't go along with this idea which my HOA has implemented and enforced. Then you may need to take different measures. It is your life, your choice and your child.
wolf_fire
New member
I completely agree with your point of the gun always being in a safe place if it is holstered. It can't go off in a holster and it can't go off if you aren't fiddling with the trigger.
However if my Glock were on the table in an area where a 5 year old was, my Glock would not be able to go off either, since it would be unloaded with the slide back. Which gets back to your original premise that no one would be able to fiddle with your firearm since it is properly holstered. Please don't tell me that a 5 yr old wouldn't be smart enough to bump the external safety and be able to pull the low weight trigger on your 1911.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
There are a lot of LE and military retirees in every community who would volunteer for such duty too. I would, and I have as much if not more training than most county cops in my area, I know that for sure.
Blues
superprincess
New member
I agree as I stated in my last post, this was my suggestion parents should pay for the security of their children when at school. Is it going to hurt them to write a check to the school each month. What is more important your child's safety or cable television? Hope you agree, this should not be at the taxpayer's expense, some of us do not have children in school.
E
ezkl2230
Guest
Sorry, but I disagree.
The safety of our children is part and parcel of providing for their education, and as has been pointed out so many times, the entire district benefits from the presence of schools - regardless of whether you currently have kids there or not. If you want to begin breaking down what you pay in taxes, then I shouldn't have to pay the part of taxes that pays for the sports program, or the shop class, or the home ec classes, because none of my kids are in those programs. I shouldn't have to pay for the salary of the school administrators, or the teachers, or the janitors or anyone else associated with the schools if I don't have kids there., and I don't make use of the community ed classes so I shouldn't have to pay taxes to support them, either. I don't go to the parks, so I shouldn't have to pay for them, and I shouldn't have to pay for the fire department, because I have never had to use their services. There are some things we pay for because they benefit the community as a whole - whether or not we make use of those services as individuals. And where school protection is concerned, you can either pay for it now to make the school safe, or you can pay for it after the attack has occurred and you have to foot the bill for the overtime required of police and other emergency responders to clean up afterwards, in addition to the increased insurance premiums now required of the school district, and the possible legal bills required to defend the district when parents sue it for failing to do what they paid for in the first place - providing a safe environment in which to educate the children of our communities. It is part of what our tax dollars go for, and it is a responsibility assumed by the schools for as long as they have students in their custody.
As the husband of a public school teacher, I see where a lot of our tax dollars go in school expenses - high salaries, benefit packages, and leased vehicles for administrators, the constant "need" to replace current, serviceable facilities with monuments to technology on the assumption that such facilities will boost sagging test scores, constant, expensive changes of curriculum to the latest experiment guaranteed to reverse the downward trends in scores and accommodate all of the different cultures and languages to be found in a given district, and other projects that really should take a back seat to what is really necessary for a solid education. Providing a safe environment is a basic responsibility of a school district - not some additional tax to be charged to the parents of their students to provide what was supposed to be provided all along. And along those lines, if we have community members or teachers who are willing to fill this need at their own expense, then we should be grateful that they are willing to step up as good citizens.
CoolClownFish
Web/Graphics Designer
In don't think it could have been explained any better than that. Well said! You should consider speaking to the states and school boards about this because you have a unique way of wording it and it makes complete sense to me.
superprincess
New member
I agree it is a basic responsibility of the school district, but as you can see the districts aren't doing such a great job. Ideas need to be generated for schools to come up with a solution to this issue. I still stand by my idea, so far I haven't heard any better ideas. Pretty sure every single teacher is not going to carry a weapon, even if given the permission.
Being a parent means making sacrifices for your child. My example of cable is just an example. A parent can provide for the school security payment, any way they wish. A small payment each month shouldn’t make that much difference, when you consider how many families will be paying for the security. You know what they say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. We all know providing schools is the right thing to do, for the communities. Taxpayers have done this and are still continuing to build schools. For instance, the Sandy Hook building is being demolished and being replaced with a new one. Let’s hope it has a security system set in place to protect everyone in the school. Our taxpayers are overburdened as it is with the national debt. Did I read your post correctly? Should we keep adding additional expenses? Could the request of top-notch school security do what PPACA couldn’t do, shut the government down permanently? Of course we could raise the debt ceiling a little higher.
The US owes more than 17 trillion 68 billion and thousands are adding up each second.
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time
Looking at the overall big picture. Can the US apply the top-notch security measures in ALL schools in America. If they could I am sure they would have tried by now. The government is still trying to solve the issue of government waste in the food stamp program. The recipients have been selling food stamps for years and now on Craig’s List, right under the government’s nose. If only, we could eliminate the people's benefits who are defrauding the government. When parents negligence and contribution to a minor leads to the death of innocent children and teachers, then the laws should be enforced. When are the politician’s going to grow a backbone and enforce laws. When are irresponsible parents going to stop making weapons: guns, knives, box cutters and etc. easily accessible for children to carry to school and wreak havoc, death and destruction?
wolf_fire
New member
You know, I never thought of having retired vets as voluntary security at schools. What a heck of an idea, and I bet a lot of them would be more than willing to continue to serve the people. Thanks Blues.
Thinking this through, I bet there are a lot of folks who run firearm training who would be willing to offer their training to teachers if the teachers were required to go through such training to carry at school.
wolf_fire
New member
There doesn't need to be cost. If the teachers who normally do carry in their every day life were just allowed, then you would have FREE security.
I know without taking a poll at my school of at least a dozen teachers who have mentioned to me that they would carry and go through any required training to carry at school. I'm sure if I were to go around to each teacher individually that number would be higher.
AndeyHall
Active member
I swear all these school shootings have everything to do with the way they're trying to combat violence in schools. I don't know about the schools where you live, but I know at my high school, if you got into a fight there was a good chance you were gonna be expelled. Then you pile that on top of this bullying epidemic. These kids who are being bullied are probably telling all the adults they can who aren't doing anything about it, and they're too scared to handle it themselves (by punching the kid in the face) for fear of being expelled and facing their parents. That is until they keep it bottled up for so long until they can't take it anymore that they show up for school with a 9mm or a 12ga shotgun and start blowing peoples heads off.
When the day comes that I have children of my own and they get to be old enough to have to deal with these issues at school, I'm definitely going to teach them that if someone starts bullying them, you first ask them to stop (which probably won't work). If it doesn't work, then you tell a teacher and tell them if they don't put a stop to it (because I guarantee most teachers blow it off as nothing and don't ever do anything about it) then you have permission from your parents to take care of it yourself. That should definitely get school administration's attention.
The teachers are too damn lazy to go after bullies, yet they have no probably with suspending or expelling elementary school children who innocently point their fingers in the shape of a gun or chew their pop tarts into a certain shape. What the hell is the world coming to?
When the day comes that I have children of my own and they get to be old enough to have to deal with these issues at school, I'm definitely going to teach them that if someone starts bullying them, you first ask them to stop (which probably won't work). If it doesn't work, then you tell a teacher and tell them if they don't put a stop to it (because I guarantee most teachers blow it off as nothing and don't ever do anything about it) then you have permission from your parents to take care of it yourself. That should definitely get school administration's attention.
The teachers are too damn lazy to go after bullies, yet they have no probably with suspending or expelling elementary school children who innocently point their fingers in the shape of a gun or chew their pop tarts into a certain shape. What the hell is the world coming to?
mappow
New member
My point, although not expressed, was I would sooner spend tax money educating educators then spend huge amounts on officers posted at schools.
