After Uvalde - Proposals to arm teachers

[Alk8944]

Maybe someone else has brought this up already, but I have given thought to this and have arrived at a different aspect that needs to be considered.


In the past I have been a proponent of school teachers being armed. That said there is another, perhaps more compelling reason why they should not be! If this ever becomes a common practice what has really been accomplished? Teachers would then be the first target in the event, GOD forbid, that there would ever be another episode like Uvalde. Just the suggestion that they should be armed may have already put this in the minds of other deranged people who may be considering such an act in the future just because the public news media have covered this possibility.



If the teacher is shot/killed first in such an event the children have lost their primary defense! A mature, experienced teacher has the best chance of negotiating, or at least delaying the perpetrator to allow Police more time to respond.


I am not looking for opinions, comments or likes, but you may do any of these if you feel so moved. Just something for everyone to consider

[Rustyt1953]

This article is about a neighboring county where my daughter and her family live. She's all for it. So am I.

Sheriff Jones encourages schools to arm teachers, '''rebukes''' comments by President

[Rlg#17]

Originally Posted by Alk8944

Maybe someone else has brought this up already, but I have given thought to this and have arrived at a different aspect that needs to be considered.


In the past I have been a proponent of school teachers being armed. That said there is another, perhaps more compelling reason why they should not be! If this ever becomes a common practice what has really been accomplished? Teachers would then be the first target in the event, GOD forbid, that there would ever be another episode like Uvalde. Just the suggestion that they should be armed may have already put this in the minds of other deranged people who may be considering such an act in the future just because the public news media have covered this possibility.



If the teacher is shot/killed first in such an event the children have lost their primary defense! A mature, experienced teacher has the best chance of negotiating, or at least delaying the perpetrator to allow Police more time to respond.


I am not looking for opinions, comments or likes, but you may do any of these if you feel so moved. Just something for everyone to consider

Do you really, honestly believe that someone that shoots their grandmother in the face can be negotiated with by anyone? The current generation, idk how they are even referred to has no problem taking their skills from Call of Duty and slaughtering innocents wherever they choose. Schools, grocery stores, subway platforms, workplace etc are all fair game.

Evil exists today for whatever reasons. Lack of discipline and or parenting. Guidelines, structure, not having to be the child’s best friend.

Zero consequences for their actions. See above for both the younglings, and adults that commit these horrific acts. Just out to get their moment of fame.

Don’t even get me started on the use of psychotropic drugs, turning the last several generations into the horrible mishmash of human beings that they have become.

Read some of the books written by Lt. Col. Grossman reference the subject! Chilling to say the least, but he’s an authority on the subject.

Uvalde, they sat outside for what 80 minutes? Delayed by the Chief who said to stand down? Against the current doctrine of get there, go in there, go to the shooter, neutralize the threat!

Sorry, that kind of evil cannot be talked out of what they are gonna do.

The problem is only going to get worse…

Regards, Rick Gibbs

[teletech]

I don't think arming folks who don't want to be armed is going to have good outcomes. You will get resentment and mostly barely scrape-by qualifications, plus these folks have a lot of other things to do. Most of my teachers were of, well let's say an advanced age and I'm not sure would be much use in a fight. For those who *want* to carry, then sure, but making it policy is a bad plan. We need to seek answers on the other end of this. The challenge there is justification of cost: if you have a program that reduces kids loosing it, then nothing happens and it's hard to point to anything and say "money well spent". The same thing happens in medical intervention, lots of money for treatment of disease, not a lot on prevention. I'd rather use the money to bring back school nurses, counselors, music,... whatever. We also need to study the roots of antisocial violence. Not guns, those are the tools, but the impulses.
This, like all free opinions, worth what you paid for it.

[SAFireman]

Texas has had the 'Guardian' program for several years now. It was up to each district if they would implement it, and who & how many they would select. I don't recall hearing any stories where a 'Guardian' teacher(or administrator) stopped any threat with deadly force.

I am in favor of ANY law abiding citizen carrying in school buildings. There is NO need to notify the school admins or elected board members of WHO is carrying. It should be known only to that individual. The element of surprise is far better than the burdens foisted upon the system of trying to qualify, train, and hide the identities of the 'Guardians'.

I can't speak to specifics of anyone, at any specific time, at any specific place, but I suspect that there have been a lot of guns on Texas campuses that nobody ever knew about....so much for 'gun free zones' eh?

[pharmer]

I spent the last 15 of my 53 working years as a High School Math teacher. Lots of talk about arming us up before the Covid fiasco. Even with 34 years carrying on a permit I would not even consider carrying in the classroom. Fraught with danger on it's face, if a "shooter" situation arose, draw and eliminate the threat. Unfortunately one of your rounds (Lotta missing going on when somebody is shooting to kill you) kills O'Shaunessey's kid. Even if you neutralize the threat, you ain't the hero and your life is headed for the toilet, if not prison. Nope, not doing it. Plenty of younger, gung ho types ready to go. I'm retired now, thankfully. Joe

[Tam 3]

Eliminate the "gun free zone" and free those that will carry what they legally can.

Regards,

Tam 3

[pantannojack]

How many armored car drivers are armed? Is your kid in school as valuable as the contents of a bank loaded A Car?

[biku324]

Originally Posted by SAFireman

Texas has had the 'Guardian' program for several years now. It was up to each district if they would implement it, and who & how many they would select. I don't recall hearing any stories where a 'Guardian' teacher(or administrator) stopped any threat with deadly force.

I am in favor of ANY law abiding citizen carrying in school buildings. There is NO need to notify the school admins or elected board members of WHO is carrying. It should be known only to that individual. The element of surprise is far better than the burdens foisted upon the system of trying to qualify, train, and hide the identities of the 'Guardians'.

Texas has had this program since 2013. Participation has been almost nil. If teachers wanted to be police, they wouldn't be teachers.

But since the bill’s passage into law in 2013, just 84 school districts have opted into the program, a sliver of the more than 1,200 school districts across the state. Of those districts, only 361 people have ever become a licensed school marshal across a state that has 9,000 campuses and more than 369,000 public school teachers. Few Texas school districts are using the school marshal program | The Texas Tribune

[WR Moore]

The OP does have a point, but I highly doubt that all teachers, or even a significant minority, would decide to be armed. That declining even if it might save their own lives is some measure of the unsuitability of many.

Current school construction/design also leaves a lot to be desired. All but one of the public schools I attended were WPA built. I expect the walls would have stopped even GI ball from the then current service rifles. Hardening the exteriors and rigid enforcement of keeping the exterior doors locked would go a good way to minimize dangers.

Access control will always be a weak point. While in many schools you have to buzz the office, possibly get inspected on CCTV to enter, I expect in most cases if you don't look like an Islamic Terrorist in full costume, you're gonna get buzzed in. Maybe even if you do.

Some years back I was looking at an Israeli website. If it wasn't disinformation, they claimed an armed, aged volunteer teachers aide stopped a would be terrorist. I expect some retirees with suitable backgrounds would welcome something constructive to do a couple of times a week.

[RCL-09]

I see this type of argument quite a lot, the ...gun free zones work.... best to not allow people to have a firearm to defend themselves... If we let people carry there will be blood running the streets... teachers are not smart enough to be allowed to carry a firearm... just talk the suicidal mass murdering sociopath down...

How about this. If a teacher wishes to be armed, train them and allow it.

Would you rather be an unarmed teacher when the suicidal mass murdering sociopath walks in to your classroom?

Would you want to be unarmed when an active shooter incident begins? So you can just close the door and hope? Or would you rather be able to close the door and prepare to meet the threat while armed?

[Kanewpadle]

Having secured homes, businesses, and schools for the last 30 years I can tell you first hand that most people aren’t concerned about physical security as much they are about others things.

There’s always an excuse.

I have dogs.
I have an alarm system.
If they really want to get in, they will.
Locks only keep honest people out.

But there is proof that none of the above is adequate by themselves. Physical security must be layered. Complacency must not be allowed.

The frustrating thing is that it is not difficult to secure a school building. Sure it takes money. But not like millions of dollars.

If you make it more difficult by adding the proper locking systems along with a comprehensive physical security plan that everyone understands and adheres to school shootings would decline.

[djohns6]

Originally Posted by teletech

I don't think arming folks who don't want to be armed is going to have good outcomes. You will get resentment and mostly barely scrape-by qualifications, plus these folks have a lot of other things to do. Most of my teachers were of, well let's say an advanced age and I'm not sure would be much use in a fight. For those who *want* to carry, then sure, but making it policy is a bad plan. .

I have never seen anyone advocate arming Teachers against their will .

[RCL-09]

Originally Posted by djohns6

I have never seen anyone advocate arming Teachers against their will .

Nor have I, except with the anti 2nd crowd that use it as hyperbole to proffer their agenda.

[RCL-09]

Originally Posted by Kanewpadle

Having secured homes, businesses, and schools for the last 30 years I can tell you first hand that most people aren’t concerned about physical security as much they are about others things.

There’s always an excuse.

I have dogs.
I have an alarm system.
If they really want to get in, they will.
Locks only keep honest people out.

But there is proof that none of the above is adequate by themselves. Physical security must be layered. Complacency must not be allowed.

The frustrating thing is that it is not difficult to secure a school building. Sure it takes money. But not like millions of dollars.

If you make it more difficult by adding the proper locking systems along with a comprehensive physical security plan that everyone understands and adheres to school shootings would decline.

Real security is doable, but it is costly in terms of money, time, and effort. This is moreso for large/public entities/buildings.

Measures have to be put in place. Training has tobe done. More than anything people have to follow it.

I can tell you firsthand that when we develop such security plans people balk at them because of that.

All the physical security in the world, paid for and put in place, is useless unless people abide by it.

Locked doors, limited access and secure areas are worthless when people circumvent them... leave the door propped open... Let their friend or a stranger in because of the "effort" to make sure the protocols are followed.

Then, with success, people get lazier. Why? Well because nothing ever happens, so everything is secure, and a lot of the measures seem bothersome, tedious, time consuming....

[edwardyoung]

My wife’s a retired elementary school teacher. When they’d have their stupid ‘shelter in place’ drills, they’d lock themselves in their room, or a closet if they had one. She always commented that while she was standing there, cowering, she wondered what she’d use as a weapon if an armed scumbag somehow got her door open. A stapler? She told her principal that she’d love to be able to have a gun. The principal was sure that ‘cowering in place’ and waiting on the police response was a much better idea. I’m sure some in Uvalde felt that way before the police stood in the hallway for an hour, listening to the maniac shoot students and teachers at his leisure. He could have killed as many with a single shot 22 and a pocket full of 22lr. More and more, help isn’t coming. We’re responsible for us

[biku324]

Solutions that people have proven not to use really are not solutions.

[Buford57]

One other thought on arming teachers or removing restrictions on CC in schools (neither of which I oppose): make sure the gun is not in your hand when LE arrives. In the heat of the moment heroes aren't always distinguishable from active shooters.

[Loyaljeeper]

I don’t believe the majority of teachers should be armed. In fact, I bet a large number of them would refuse if even given the option.

Here is something to ponder. I have about 16 years of total experience carrying a firearm as a professional working for federal, state, and local agencies, and I have a Bachelors in Criminal Justice. I am currently a firearms instructor for my agency, and I teach firearms at the local community college’s police academy. If I became a teacher tomorrow, there is no legal way for me to carry as a teacher in most states.

[RCL-09]

Originally Posted by Loyaljeeper

I don’t believe the majority of teachers should be armed. In fact, I bet a large number of them would refuse if even given the option.

Here is something to ponder. I have about 16 years of total experience carrying a firearm as a professional working for federal, state, and local agencies, and I have a Bachelors in Criminal Justice. I am currently a firearms instructor for my agency, and I teach firearms at the local community college’s police academy. If I became a teacher tomorrow, there is no legal way for me to carry as a teacher in most states.

Help me out here.

So teachers should not have the ability/right to carry?

If you were to become a teacher, you should not have the ability/right to carry?

A military veteran, or retired LEO, who becomes a teacher should not have the ability/right to carry?

[Hair Trigger]

If it ever comes to pass, to arm teachers, arm only the ones who want to be armed, and train them to the level of law enforcement officers. This training to include actual firearms use and the scenarios of shoot/don't shoot situations. Then, no one at the school, except the principal, should know which teachers are armed, sort of like Air Marshalls on an airplane. Have a plan in place where these armed teachers can be made aware of a situation where they are needed, via the PA, or text, or lights, etc.

Most of the teachers I was acquainted with while my kids were in grammar school and high school wouldn't have known which end of the gun was the dangerous one, and would be afraid to see one lying unattended. To arm them would have been a greater hazard than not to, so if this plan is taken forward, the powers that be better have their own act together.

[biku324]

Folks are not hearing. Texas has had specific programs to allow school districts and teachers to be armed. Since 2013. They don't do it, and that's in Texas - imagine how few in Rhode Island or Oregon would arm themselves.

[LPD256]

To be honest, we all know making 18 year olds ineligible to buy long guns will not stop school shootings. Arming Old Man Larson the Algebra teacher will not stop school shootings. Someone will buy little Bobby a gun. Probably his Mom like at Newtown. Or he’ll borrow his Uncle’s from an unlocked closet. 19 cops with AR’s, vests, and shields couldn’t or wouldn’t stop Uvalde. Old Man Larson doesn’t have a chance. He would tell us 2+2=4. Not 5. And the first jackass that shows up at a school open-carrying an AK-47 because they can, will make responsible gun owners look like we are all nuts. Just my opinion.

[RCL-09]

So, teachers, as a class of people, should not be allowed to carry? They can't be trusted?

Concealed carry is useless as a defense to crime?

The teacher who is a reservist, and saw combat, is incapable?

The retired LEO that teaches criminal justice at the local HS can't be trusted? Relied upon?

The state doesn't allow it so it should not be legislated to allow it?

[ladder13]

[pharmer]

Most of the opinions here are practical and posited by folks who have never had to"stand and deliver." Typical classroom is almost 20 yds across, more than combat distance. From firsthand experience, when **** breaks loose it happens "all at once." 25 young people concentrated on their phones or somesuch in "condition white" lose their **** instantly. No matter what you do some "non-classroom type" will critique and find fault with YOU because it's NEVER the students' fault. What will you carry? A 642, P365, maybe Glock 19? Good luck, the kids will know and "air drop" a pic of you adjusting your junk revealing your weapon. I could go on but the "trench" is established and folks have taken their positions. Joe

[edwardyoung]

Better they should die while the professionals stand in the hall

[RCL-09]

Originally Posted by pharmer

Most of the opinions here are practical and posited by folks who have never had to"stand and deliver." Typical classroom is almost 20 yds across, more than combat distance. From firsthand experience, when **** breaks loose it happens "all at once." 25 young people concentrated on their phones or somesuch in "condition white" lose their **** instantly. No matter what you do some "non-classroom type" will critique and find fault with YOU because it's NEVER the students' fault. What will you carry? A 642, P365, maybe Glock 19? Good luck, the kids will know and "air drop" a pic of you adjusting your junk revealing your weapon. I could go on but the "trench" is established and folks have taken their positions. Joe

That is exact what the anti 2nd and anti carry tell us about guns and CCW. Self defense will always lead to disaster. People with guns are incompetent and incapable and will end up failing and only kill innocent bystanders.

[LPD256]

There is an algorithm that sends me unsolicited shoe advertisements when I look at shoe online. Could someone please develop an algorithm that notifies authorities when someone is threatening to shoot up a school, church, shopping mall, business that fired them or whatever. So many times there are signs that are ignored. Can we develop a protocol of locking the schools down. There should never be a propped-open door. The ones that get stopped before they happen usually involve someone that was paying attention and said to the proper people that something was going on with the shooter. Having some trained people in the school whether it’s teachers, School Resource Officers or janitors may make sense, but it can’t be the only thing. Parkland had one Deputy. Uvalde had its own Police force. But whomever has a gun better have the training. And pray there are no negligent discharges, or accidental shootings. Or students fighting and the teacher drops their weapon breaking up the fight. Lots to consider. Lots of responsibility to go around. It’s sad we even need to discuss it.

[venomballistics]

This whole thing needs a roll back and redo.
Lockdown sounds cool, but you may as well order escaping kids back in to wait if you're locking them in with a psychotic murderer.

[venomballistics]

Originally Posted by RCL-09

So, teachers, as a class of people, should not be allowed to carry? They can't be trusted?

Concealed carry is useless as a defense to crime?

The teacher who is a reservist, and saw combat, is incapable?

The retired LEO that teaches criminal justice at the local HS can't be trusted? Relied upon?

The state doesn't allow it so it should not be legislated to allow it?

Truth be told, many educators of today probably shouldn't carry.
Really, these shouldn't be educators either, but, here we are

[LPD256]

Originally Posted by venomballistics

This whole thing needs a roll back and redo.
Lockdown sounds cool, but you may as well order escaping kids back in to wait if you're locking them in with a psychotic murderer.

Lockdown is to keep bad guys out. Not keep good guys in. If the back door had been locked in Uvalde there would have been a different outcome potentially. The classroom door was unlocked. So he walked on in through two unlocked doors and started shooting.

[Doug M.]

Very few teachers will want to carry, and that's fine with me. If they do not have the sheepdog mindset and a real understanding of bad folks and violent criminals, they might have a firearm, but would not be armed. There will be some who can do the job, and will make the commitment to learn what they need and go from there. I suspect that some of our local school staff are armed, and no one knows. That's fine with me.

For most of us past the prime of youth, a good mid-sized pistol with a red dot will be the right platform. A J frame? Nope. Almost never. Mindset will make the difference. The correct answer to an active killer is to hunt them and shoot them. Period. Unless for some odd reason one is close enough to simply stick the puzzle in his/her ear and fire, a J frame is not the right platform.

There are a lot of steps that can and should be taken. Arming is a niche platform. Not a 100% solution, but one that fits narrow circumstances.

[6string]

The problem is the school system itself.
-Education replaced with indoctination.
-Academic standards eliminated to facilitate matriculation of even the worst students.
-Bureaucracy and incompetence has replaced accountability and professionalism.
-Public schools as a microcosm of a social system most closely resemble a dictatorship infested with chronyism and corruption.

Most of the collegiate students that I've known who pursue a bachelor's degree in education with the intent of joining the public education workforce are, at best, amongst the most mediocre students. Quite a few would be otherwise unemployable. I wouldn't want to see any if them armed!

If your child has any exceptional gift or talent, they will never achieve their true potential in a public school. But, if someone's child is a psychopath, deviant, or just plain thug, they will be totally accomodated and protected.
Why would anyone send their kids to such a place?
The best option is home schooling or a well vetted private school.

If enough good people took their kids out of the public school, the whole system would just collapse.
The country would be much better off.
And, your kids would be much safer!

[Frailer]

Last year I retired as a high school teacher. Before that, I spent 25 years on active duty in the US Army. I have attended training classes by “big name” instructors, and I shoot action pistol matches 2-3 times a month.

I say that only to establish that I know what it means to be a teacher, and I am capable of wielding a firearm with a modicum of skill.

I was approached by my district’s superintendent a few years ago when our school board was contemplating arming teachers. I told him I would carry if asked, but I did not wish to do so. Carrying a firearm in a classroom setting would complicate my work in ways that I simply didn’t want to deal with. I don’t expect those without classroom experience to understand this, but I suspect most teachers will.

Teachers have a job. Being a cop ain’t it.

[Andres]

Frailer: Thank you for your service in both Military and as a Teacher! We Parents already ask you to be a sacrificial Lamb to the Evil and wickedness out there. Why NOT allow you to better protect our children and yourselves by giving those who want to, better chances of surviving an ungodly event like the topic matter. My wife is a school teacher, we have a few members at the Club I belong to that are School Teachers, they all understand the danger's and the benefits of carrying a firearm in that environment. It is YOUR responsibility to protect yourself and those in your care. The best way to Stop an Evil Doer with a Gun, Is Usually a Good Guy with a Gun.... Laws Don't, Paper/Signs on Walls Don't, Pleading and begging for them to Stop DON'T.... Putting a Bullet into the Hard-drive does!!!! 27 Years as an Armed Professional, has taught me that!

[RCL-09]

Originally Posted by Frailer

Last year I retired as a high school teacher. Before that, I spent 25 years on active duty in the US Army. I have attended training classes by “big name” instructors, and I shoot action pistol matches 2-3 times a month.

I say that only to establish that I know what it means to be a teacher, and I am capable of wielding a firearm with a modicum of skill.

I was approached by my district’s superintendent a few years ago when our school board was contemplating arming teachers. I told him I would carry if asked, but I did not wish to do so. Carrying a firearm in a classroom setting would complicate my work in ways that I simply didn’t want to deal with. I don’t expect those without classroom experience to understand this, but I suspect most teachers will.

Teachers have a job. Being a cop ain’t it.

What about those that do want to be trained and armed?

And no one is asking them to be cops any more than people with an LTC.

[biku324]

A great way to reduce potential threats is to identify potential risks, then identify means within your capacity to mitigate the potential threats. Based on Texas' experience, voluntarily arming teachers isn't a viable option.

What any school can do within the law and what is reasonably affordale is to close campuses, establish exclusive, serious entry control points, and employ at least some armed police (with proper supervision, training, and equipment).

[pharmer]

Originally Posted by RCL-09

That is exact what the anti 2nd and anti carry tell us about guns and CCW. Self defense will always lead to disaster. People with guns are incompetent and incapable and will end up failing and only kill innocent bystanders.

I just can't get through. Stop conflating "2A bull" with actual classroom/campus reality. IT'S ONLY MY OPINION, but an armed teacher will be expected to be the "solution" in an active shooter situation. The COPS stay outside soiling their shorts almost every time so teachers will be expected to duck into a phone booth to reveal their "S" branded tights. Carry on. Joe

[biku324]

Originally Posted by RCL-09

What about those that do want to be trained and armed?

And no one is asking them to be cops any more than people with an LTC.

Texas has done that. Three hundred sixty-one teachers out of the 369,000 K-12 teachers in the whole state in 9 years seems a tad light to be all that helpful.

[venomballistics]

Originally Posted by LPD256

Lockdown is to keep bad guys out. Not keep good guys in. If the back door had been locked in Uvalde there would have been a different outcome potentially. The classroom door was unlocked. So he walked on in through two unlocked doors and started shooting.

That would describe normal operating procedures.
But whenever there's an incident in or near a school, we her " went into lockdown" as a response to that incident. What, exactly is that condition?

[Moose074]

Ok my first post here. Full disclosure I am veteran, former correctional officer, I have my chl and I am currently teaching. As mentioned above Texas allows schools to arm its teachers. The district’s don’t force teachers to carry. My school doesn’t, most teachers don’t have the mental capacity to kill even if it meant saving a life. Until they treat schools like prison or a weapons storages area they will remain a soft target.

[venomballistics]

Originally Posted by biku324

Texas has done that. Three hundred sixty-one teachers out of the 369,000 K-12 teachers in the whole state in 9 years seems a tad light to be all that helpful.

Had a history teacher that detailed the parts and function of the M-14 battle rifle
Don't think we have many like him in the system today

[LPD256]

Originally Posted by venomballistics

That would describe normal operating procedures.
But whenever there's an incident in or near a school, we her " went into lockdown" as a response to that incident. What, exactly is that condition?

What I mean by “lockdown” is probably not a great term. Simply stated, control the entry into the schools. Most places already do that. Breaker bars on the inside would allow running out of the school. Simply having a working lock on the back door in Uvalde and locking the classroom doors would have slowed the entry of the shooter. The Police response was actually pretty fast. All the school training for active shooter in a grade school is wasting time if they don’t at minimum lock the doors. Little kids can’t pile desks, fight with fire extinguishers, or do anything but hide and try to stay quiet.

[Frailer]

Originally Posted by RCL-09

What about those that do want to be trained and armed?

And no one is asking them to be cops any more than people with an LTC.

I know which of my former colleagues would “want to be trained and armed.” I don’t want them armed in the classroom, and if you knew them, you wouldn’t either. All of them have a highly inflated sense of their own skills, and none have been tested under fire.

And we would indeed be asking them to be cops. I carry a gun every day, but I do so to protect me and mine—and only me and mine—from threats, not a building full of people.

Securing schools is an extremely complex (and, as others have said, multi-layered) problem, and *one* potential tool in the toolbox of solutions is providing a means for teachers to access firearms in an emergency. But generally speaking having teachers carry handguns in classrooms is, in my opinion, stupid.

Finally, let’s be careful not to learn too much from what happened at Uvalde. This tragedy was an infuriating cascade of mistakes and negligence.

[sotexas]

Who would assume the Civil liability when the inevitable bad moment happens?

[steelslaver]

I would much rather see an TRAINED armed security person at every school than most teachers. That and actual security. once the kids are in thee building entrance should only be by a set of doors where you enter one set and they lock behind you and you must communicate by camera to either gain entrance or leave. If people knew they could easily be trapped they would be far less apt to try.

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Originally Posted by sotexas

Who would assume the Civil liability when the inevitable bad moment happens?

Who assumes the civil liability now when the inevitable bad moment happens?

[Muss Muggins]

Kids being kids, the major problem I see is "I was afraid to not do what he/she said, he/she has a gun . . . " or "He/she keeps letting their gun show when they're mad at me . . . " when the inevitable dispute between teacher and student arises . . .

[Frailer]

One final point, and then I’ll shut up on this topic.

I’m not calling out any of the participants in this thread; I’m merely talking about the discussion in our society at large. Why is it that the group of people that is calling loudest for the arming of teachers is the same group that doesn’t trust teachers to determine what and how students should be taught?

Folks who haven’t set foot in a classroom in two or three decades seem to be the most outspoken “experts.”