NC: School Security Act of 2019

[g-dad]

This has uphill challenges but at least there is an effort being made.

Here's the article: NEWS: NC Bill Would Pay Teachers More Who Train & Carry Guns in Schools - GetZone

Here's the bill: Senate Bill 192 2019-2020 Session - North Carolina General Assembly

 

[URIT]

Interesting and I wish them luck.

The NC legislature might be more effective in minimizing the carnage in a school shooting by authorizing the use of door security devices that could be installed in seconds once an alarm was sounded. Granted, they would need to overcome the school districts' legal team, the Fire Marshal's, and the insurance industries objections.

Current tactics involve hiding in an open classroom behind desks. That is about as effective as the school practice in the 1950s of hiding under your desk during a nuclear attack.

 

[4506517]

Wait until Marsha Morey gets ahold of that bill.

 

[Watchdog]

NC: School Security Act of 2019...This has uphill challenges but at least there is an effort being made.

You know, Dan, saying this bill has uphill challenges is a massive understatement. I saw something about this on the local news this morning. If this bill passed both houses, Roy Cooper wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Not if he has any ideas about a second term.

Thing of it is, too, a lot of North Carolina teachers will come out against it. Not because of the gun issues, but because of the disparity in pay it would create. North Carolina already doesn't pay its teachers commensurate with their abilities and qualifications, and now someone's proposing to pay only some teachers more just for arming themselves? And earmark $9.3 million to train them? I think you and I both know even the Wright Brothers wouldn't be able to make this one fly.

The bill would also give the armed teachers arrest powers, but with no real law enforcement and legal training. I hate to say it, but this proposed law would be multiple lawsuits and court challenges just waiting to happen.

Personally, I don't think it's a bad idea at all, but it'd need a lot more work before being accepted by lawmakers, teachers, and parents.

 

[touchoneoff]

Well, I have to admit though, that if trained and armed security were posted at schools across the country, I bet the bull pucky would stop with these random attacks.

 

[stansdds]

It is absolutely amazing that the same people who oppose armed guards in schools to protect their children, have no problem with armed guards in banks to protect their money and some of these people have no problem with armed guards acting as their personal protection. Just one of things that I ponder and it makes me go "hmmmmm".

 

[vigil617]

The same bill died in committee last year. This was after the mass shooting at Parkland High School in Florida. For some reason, the bill's sponsor thinks it's time for another go 'round.

Improving school security is a must. Arming teachers, a must not. There are better and safer ways to go about this important work.

Having seen some of what passes for teachers in this state, it scares the daylights out of me to think about any of them being armed. No knock on the many great professionals out there, but the qualities that impel someone to become a teacher shouldn't be conflated with those that would make a reliable and safe security guard.

And holding out the carrot of extra pay for packing heat? Really, can it get much more obscene than that? Isn't that sending exactly the wrong message -- appealing to greed in the name of making students safer?

 

[Steve K]

I think the pros out weigh the cons of this discussion. The armed teachers should be volunteers only and they should attend and pass the police academy firearms course. This training should also be reoccurring. Most of the teachers killed during these shootings died protecting the students. Why not even the playing field by allowing the staff to get into the fight?

 

[Watchdog]

I think the pros out weigh the cons of this discussion.

I think any pros and cons are going to wind up being immaterial. As I mentioned earlier, I agree with the idea in principle. But there are so many things wrong with the draft of this bill as it's written, it's already one of those snowball-in-Hell bills.

This will go absolutely nowhere.

 

[The Big D]

Ridiculous.

I am personal friends with many teachers. Family members are teachers.

They did NOT sign on to be security guards. Most are wholly unwilling/incapable of toting a gun whilst teaching.

The NC idiots who sponsored this clearly do not know teachers or have not been in a classroom other than as a student...if that. Or perhaps they are Dook grads.

Amazing.

Be safe.

 

[ladder13]

I think the pros out weigh the cons of this discussion. The armed teachers should be volunteers only and they should attend and pass the police academy firearms course. This training should also be reoccurring. Most of the teachers killed during these shootings died protecting the students. Why not even the playing field by allowing the staff to get into the fight?

I see you actually read the Bill.

 

[M29since14]

I am personal friends with many teachers. Family members are teachers.

They did NOT sign on to be security guards. Most are wholly unwilling/incapable of toting a gun whilst teaching...

Humph! Must be something in the water over your way, or maybe mine. I am also acquainted with several primary and secondary teachers. A few of them would like very much to have some means to protect their students and themselves.

Neither position seems ridiculous to me. I can see both sides of this argument and, as is usual, cookie-cutter solutions are great (i.e., “safe”) for administrators but of limited real value. Seems to me the utility and success of the legislation, should it pass, will depend entirely on the individuals involved. But absolutely, no teacher should be required to participate. And I don’t see any reason to pay the teacher, except for maybe the time spent in regular, required training. JMHO.

 

[g-dad]

I am personal friends with many teachers. Family members are teachers.

They did NOT sign on to be security guards. Most are wholly unwilling/incapable of toting a gun whilst teaching.

The NC idiots who sponsored this clearly do not know teachers or have not been in a classroom other than as a student...if that. Or perhaps they are Dook grads.

Amazing.

Be safe.

There are going to be pros and cons to this and it won't get solved here. I posted this for the simple reason to keep the safety of the kids first and foremost in our minds and to open a positive dialogue. Making schools a hard target is the issue. I for one don't have a solution but doing nothing is not the answer. If all you can offer is calling someone who is attempting to do effect change an idiot or throwing off on an entire body of college grads, then sir you have nothing positive to offer here and I would appreciate you not commenting in this thread. No I did not attend Duke.

 

[Watchdog]

UPDATE: March 13, 2019

The bill passed 1st Reading on March 7, 2019.

Referred to the Committee on Rules and Operations of the Senate on March 7, 2019.

The bill is no longer S. B. 150.

It is now officially S. B. 192.

 

[The Big D]

Wow!

Sorry to rain on your parade...but arming people who chose a customarily unarmed profession is, indeed, idiotic...IMHO, of course.

What next? Arm everyone...every job?

For the record, I am very much in favor of making schools harder targets and was, in fact, a college adjunct instructor for more than 25 years and a substitute teacher in my post-retirement ‘career.’

Studies are clear in reflecting the vast majority of teachers don’t want guns in schools. My experience with professional educators and administrators is the same.

Re: the Dook reference, it was intended to be humorous. Sorry you didn’t get it.

Be safe.

There are going to be pros and cons to this and it won't get solved here. I posted this for the simple reason to keep the safety of the kids first and foremost in our minds and to open a positive dialogue. Making schools a hard target is the issue. I for one don't have a solution but doing nothing is not the answer. If all you can offer is calling someone who is attempting to do effect change an idiot or throwing off on an entire body of college grads, then sir you have nothing positive to offer here and I would appreciate you not commenting in this thread. No I did not attend Duke.

 

[g-dad]

Sorry to rain on your parade...but arming people who chose a customarily unarmed profession is, indeed, idiotic...IMHO, of course.

What next? Arm everyone...every job?

For the record, I am very much in favor of making schools harder targets and was, in fact, a college adjunct instructor for more than 25 years and a substitute teacher in my post-retirement ‘career.’

Studies are clear in reflecting the vast majority of teachers don’t want guns in schools. My experience with professional educators and administrators is the same.

Re: the Dook reference, it was intended to be humorous. Sorry you didn’t get it.

Be safe.

Thank you for contributing something of substance this time instead of general characterization and name calling.

 

[g-dad]

Sorry to rain on your parade...but arming people who chose a customarily unarmed profession is, indeed, idiotic...IMHO, of course.

What next? Arm everyone...every job?

For the record, I am very much in favor of making schools harder targets and was, in fact, a college adjunct instructor for more than 25 years and a substitute teacher in my post-retirement ‘career.’

Studies are clear in reflecting the vast majority of teachers don’t want guns in schools. My experience with professional educators and administrators is the same.

Re: the Dook reference, it was intended to be humorous. Sorry you didn’t get it.

Be safe.

Thank you for contributing something of substance this time instead of general characterization and name calling.

I have to say that although I support the concept of arms in the schools I disagree with increased pay to those who would take on the role. The flaw as I see it is there would be some to take on the responsibility just to get the pay increase and not necessarily be committed to the task. My thoughts would be a volunteer basis with continual paid training to those that are committed.

There are still hurdles and the fact that it even passed the 1st reading is amazing. The Governor would veto it anyway.

 

[Watchdog]

I have to say that although I support the concept of arms in the schools I disagree with increased pay to those who would take on the role. The flaw as I see it is there would be some to take on the responsibility just to get the pay increase and not necessarily be committed to the task.

Not to mention creating a major rift between the higher paid teachers and the ones who don't take part in the program.

I've read the bill word for word. Several times now. I think the bill is simply asking for too much. If the bill ever does come up for serious debate in the legislature before a vote, its opponents will simply gloss over the broad concept of school safety and security, and nitpick it to death on the details.

The Governor would veto it anyway.

There you go.

 

[ameridaddy]

Seems to me school mass shootings would be a lot less likely if schools took down their "Gun Free Zone" signs and the aforementioned legislature allowed permitted concealed carry in schools.
IIRC, all those murdering cowards picked a defenseless cherry to wreak their violence.
The possibility of armed opposition and its attendant mission failure just might make some would-be child killers hesitate.

 

[Watchdog]

Seems to me school mass shootings would be a lot less likely if schools took down their "Gun Free Zone" signs and the aforementioned legislature allowed permitted concealed carry in schools.

That's one of those "what if" scenarios that simply isn't gonna happen in North Carolina.