Teacher accidentally fires gun in classroom, students injured

[Revoltingest]

Whatever the heck that has to do with things.
I'm not suggesting for a moment that no teacher would want it. But suggesting 'Let's arm teachers' is asinine.

There's a problem with the phrase, "arm teachers".
To me, it means government actively arming many or most teachers.
I oppose that too.
But do you see that as different from what I propose, which is
allowing teachers (& other school staff) to be armed (concealed
carry) if they volunteer & meet stringent standards?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

There is no way any of us can accurately predict the net number but I do agree that it would decrease the chances as well.

I';m sure that with adequate study the numbers could be reasonably predicted. My point is that that study should be done FIRST before anyone even dreams of arming anyone.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

There's a problem with the phrase, "arm teachers".
To me, it means government actively arming many or most teachers.
I oppose that too.
But do you see that as different from what I propose, which is
allowing teachers (& other school staff) to be armed (concealed
carry) if they volunteer & meet stringent standards?

Yep, I do.
But I don't think your proposal could be any part of emergency planning (for example), since the number of teachers carrying, what they are carrying, and their general competence and willingness to use is not something you could rely on or be consistent.

 

[esmith]

The above is reason enough to forget gun-toting teachers.

The only answer to more-secure schools in to spend money on perimeter security, access control, camera systems and properly trained security officers.

Penny-pinching catastrophes such as arming teachers will backfire so badly.

Could you take the test? Could you, if a teacher, and with all your experience, handle a school situation?

Let's say you are teaching geography to twenty 15yr olds in a classroom situated on the rear elevation of the main school building, with three double glazed waist-high windows looking out onto playing fields, one with a side-opener for fire-escape egress. The classroom entrance door opens into a long corridor which connects other classes as well as fire-escapes and on into the main building.

It is mid-morning. As you are teaching you hear three gun-type sounds from deep within the building. You stop to listen and then hear more gun-type noises together with distant calls and shouting. Your students look around, stir, start talking together and some make to stand up.

You can have any gun you like, and build on the above scenario if you wish.

Wanna havago? Go for it!
Exactly what will you do?

First stay calm

Second does the school PA system give any information

Third are there anymore reports (like a "gun-type). If not, probably a accident like in the chemistry lab or the lawn mower the maintenance personnel are using and it backfired. In other words probably not an active shooter unless it is a shooter that only came after one specific target.

Fourth depending on the answers to Number 2 and 3 will determine the next actions

Your scenario, what are the answers to 2 and 3. Can not continue until you provide more information.

 

[esmith]

There's a problem with comparing aggressive live-fire military training & what's appropriate for
civilians, especially in controversial places like schools. Of all the accidents mentioned &
imagined here, they can be addressed with thoughtful regulation of conduct. The problem is
that too many inexperienced & thoughtless people are carrying. Back when I got my carry
license (in the 80s) it was a difficult process, with few licenses being issued. But even then
I thought the requirements were all wrong....they cared about justifying need, but not enuf
about training, which was only a couple days.
This needs to change, since very public accidents are a threat to gun rights.

Was not using military live-fire as a comparison to civilians and firearms. What I referenced was to show that even with the most severe training their will be accidents.
Civilian accidents normally will occur when a person is handling the weapon, not just carrying it. Guns do not go off by themselves unless there is a malfunction (rare).
Therefor training on firearm safety should be stressed. I don't think a Federal law can be passed that says a person has to go through firearm safety training to qualify for purchasing a firearm. I know for a fact that two large chain stores offer free training for anyone purchasing a firearm. We in this state have concealed carry without a permit and have had open carry/concealed carry outside the city limits for a very long time. I have always considered open carry within the city limits dumb (it looks stupid), yeah I know I did it when I was in high school but that was almost in the horseless carriage days.

 

[Quetzal]

I';m sure that with adequate study the numbers could be reasonably predicted. My point is that that study should be done FIRST before anyone even dreams of arming anyone.

I am 100% in support of this. The fact that we cannot study gun violence is ludicrous.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I don't think a Federal law can be passed that says a person has to go through firearm safety training to qualify for purchasing a firearm.

Why not? We have that here in Australia. You know what else we have? a much lower firearm accident rate.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

First stay calm

Second does the school PA system give any information

Third are there anymore reports (like a "gun-type). If not, probably a accident like in the chemistry lab or the lawn mower the maintenance personnel are using and it backfired. In other words probably not an active shooter unless it is a shooter that only came after one specific target.

Fourth depending on the answers to Number 2 and 3 will determine the next actions

Your scenario, what are the answers to 2 and 3. Can not continue until you provide more information.

But the teacher in the classroom doesn't have access to any more information than that already given. If it's not enough information for you to act on, what do you expect teachers to do?

 

[Woberts]

Even if the teacher is properly trained, I still see one problem: the students themselves. Say there is a student who wants to shoot someone. If there were no armed teachers, he would have to acquire the gun elsewhere, and hopefully be stopped by background checks. But if the teachers are armed, then he has a plethora of sources to acquire a gun. How is more guns the answer?

 

[Skipper]

Which highlights another point, do you think we can trust teachers with this responsibility?

Would you trust them .... especially if you were a black kid?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I am 100% in support of this. The fact that we cannot study gun violence is ludicrous.

2 "good guys with guns" accidentally fired them in schools on Tuesday

 

[Revoltingest]

Yep, I do.

Then may you acquire the aroma of fetid dingo's kidneys.

But I don't think your proposal could be any part of emergency planning (for example), since the number of teachers carrying, what they are carrying, and their general competence and willingness to use is not something you could rely on or be consistent.

Consistency requires design & dedication.
Are politicians up to that? Nah.
But as lesser measures are implemented,
we should be seeing data.

 

[Revoltingest]

Was not using military live-fire as a comparison to civilians and firearms. What I referenced was to show that even with the most severe training their will be accidents.

I got that. And I knew that you wouldn't propose such training for civilians.
But not all here would read it this way.

Civilian accidents normally will occur when a person is handling the weapon, not just carrying it. Guns do not go off by themselves unless there is a malfunction (rare).

Aye, & this is an oft overlooked aspect of training,
ie, drilling over & over basic safe handling.
I place higher value on this than on marksmanship....
....& markswomanship.....& marksLGLBTQCship.

Therefor training on firearm safety should be stressed. I don't think a Federal law can be passed that says a person has to go through firearm safety training to qualify for purchasing a firearm. I know for a fact that two large chain stores offer free training for anyone purchasing a firearm. We in this state have concealed carry without a permit and have had open carry/concealed carry outside the city limits for a very long time. I have always considered open carry within the city limits dumb (it looks stupid), yeah I know I did it when I was in high school but that was almost in the horseless carriage days.

Is it true that you once met Abraham Lincoln?

 

[esmith]

Why not? We have that here in Australia. You know what else we have? a much lower firearm accident rate.

One reason. This is not Australia.

 

[esmith]

But the teacher in the classroom doesn't have access to any more information than that already given. If it's not enough information for you to act on, what do you expect teachers to do?

Why do you say they don't have anymore information than that was provided. Ever hear of wireless communication?

 

[esmith]

I got that. And I knew that you wouldn't propose such training for civilians.
But not all here would read it this way.

Aye, & this is an oft overlooked aspect of training,
ie, drilling over & over basic safe handling.
I place higher value on this than on marksmanship....
....& markswomanship.....& marksLGLBTQCship.

Is it true that you once met Abraham Lincoln?

No, I was out yonder.....ya know beyond the wide Missouri when he was President....

 

[Quetzal]

Why do you say they don't have anymore information than that was provided. Ever hear of wireless communication?

We use alerts on our campus which goes to cell phones. Unfortunately, no everyone enrolls. I think these sort of systems should be mandate enrollment.

 

[esmith]

We use alerts on our campus which goes to cell phones. Unfortunately, no everyone enrolls. I think these sort of systems should be mandate enrollment.

especially the staff.
As far as @oldbadger scenario I could have gone farther with "what-if". The only problem with "what-if's" is not enough preparedness information was given and one can not determine a response until one knows what has been put in place, if anything, to respond to a situation. Of course the old adage of "all the plans are worthless after the first shot is fired, but planning is indispensable" must be considered.

 

[godnotgod]

Shooters, knowing that the teachers are armed, will take them out first with auto or semi-auto weaponry. Bursting into a classroom by surprise will have the upper hand. Teachers will have little chance of a first response, and in cases where they do, a handgun is no match for the kind of weapons a shooter will be carrying. The thing to do is to prevent shooters from entering onto campus grounds to begin with.

 

[oldbadger]

First stay calm

Second does the school PA system give any information

Third are there anymore reports (like a "gun-type). If not, probably a accident like in the chemistry lab or the lawn mower the maintenance personnel are using and it backfired. In other words probably not an active shooter unless it is a shooter that only came after one specific target.

Fourth depending on the answers to Number 2 and 3 will determine the next actions

Your scenario, what are the answers to 2 and 3. Can not continue until you provide more information.

The question, beyond the brief description given, was all yours to build as your imagination decided.

The point is this..... you gave an answer, you responded. The question has Been put to other armteacher supporters but none has attempted any answer at all.

It's easy to promote an idea from calm safety, harder to do it for real.

You're the only one who has shown what I call 'incident-initiative'.