Should teachers be allowed to have CHL's and carry on campus?

[josephcook78]

Personally, the way the world is headed these days, I think it would be a good idea. Any thoughts?

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Yes.......

[Delta784]

Absolutely, as long as it's voluntary, and they pass a required training/qualification course.

[sgt jon]

absolutely, as long as it's voluntary, and they pass a required training/qualification course.

^^this^^

[GangGreen712]

Absolutely, as long as it's voluntary, and they pass a required training/qualification course.

+2 on this

I think it would discourage more school shootings.

[Hokie13]

Yes, that way this man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liviu_Librescu) Instead of surviving the holocaust only to die barricading the door for his students during the VT shooting would have been able to protect his students by stopping the threat.

[deputy x 2]

I think it will only compound the problem. Leave the policing to the police.

As long as a dept has active shooter policy in place. IMHO- school shootings are more prevalent because the media plants the idea in the little pukes head.

WTSHTF- identifying the good guys from the bad guys is important. I know its reactive...but it will make the responding officers job easier.

[sgt jon]

I think it will only compound the problem. Leave the policing to the police.

As long as a dept has active shooter policy in place. IMHO- school shootings are more prevalent because the media plants the idea in the little pukes head.

WTSHTF- identifying the good guys from the bad guys is important. I know its reactive...but it will make the responding officers job easier.

I am simply relying on my recollection of recent active shooter incidents in which the person on the scene who was armed and engaged the perpetrator had an immediate mitigating effect. While I do not maintain that being armed prevents such tragedies, I would hold that having the capability to respond accordingly could serve to reduce fatalities. In the cases that come to mind, it was not responding police but people already there that engaged shooters and either ended the killings by the engaging the shooter and killing them or deflecting them into hiding.

In support of your position about knowing the good guys from the bad, I would proffer a policy tied to allowing carry on campus; akin to that given to police officers (or which should be) stressing the importance of immediate compliance with responding officers. A training element perhaps?

[Hokie13]

As long as a dept has active shooter policy in place. IMHO- school shootings are more prevalent because the media plants the idea in the little pukes head.

Definitely won't argue with you there. I read a book about the VT shooting, (can't remember the name right now). It talks about what Cho's motivations and he was regularly talking about being as good as Columbine and saying things, if they thought that was bad wait until they see what I'm gonna do. He realized in order to be famous and make the news you had to beat the record. It's sick! I like what they do in Canada, school shooting or something similar happens, nothing gets in the media.

[hopperja]

I was a high school counselor for 2 years and a middle school counselor for 8 years.

I think properly trained, responsible citizens who are employees of the school should be allowed to be armed. I think the training needs to be specific to special problems posed by schools (crowd density, large open indoor areas, etc), there should be some way for LE to identify who they are in the event LE makes entry in an active shooter case, and training needs to be on-going (it can't be a complete the training once and you're certified forever).

I think the employees who are applying to carry at school should have to pass a more stringent background check than for regular citizens; the individual and/or schools should bear the cost of that background check. To be clear, I don't think schools should be open to any CPL holder to carry concealed - it should be limited.

[deputy x 2]

I am simply relying on my recollection of recent active shooter incidents in which the person on the scene who was armed and engaged the perpetrator had an immediate mitigating effect. While I do not maintain that being armed prevents such tragedies, I would hold that having the capability to respond accordingly could serve to reduce fatalities. In the cases that come to mind, it was not responding police but people already there that engaged shooters and either ended the killings by the engaging the shooter and killing them or deflecting them into hiding.

In support of your position about knowing the good guys from the bad, I would proffer a policy tied to allowing carry on campus; akin to that given to police officers (or which should be) stressing the importance of immediate compliance with responding officers. A training element perhaps?

A huge part of our job is reactive. Sadly..there are going to be victims. But the teacher with the CHL is going to be the first. The active shooter policy our dept has...is written in a way that the threat will be stopped immediately! No wait and see...get in..seek out and stop the threat. Without getting into details...A minimum number of officers with no approval of the sgt.

Just do it!

[Sgt. Slaughter]

I think it will only compound the problem. Leave the policing to the police.

This isn't about "policing", it's about saving lives. That should be the business of every human being.

As long as a dept has active shooter policy in place.

An armed employee motivated to protect the students is a psychological deterrent, no matter the media. The same armed employee, appropriately applying deadly force can prevent the police from responding to an active shooter scenario. Rather, "active shooter in school shot by employee - no longer 'active' ".

WTSHTF- identifying the good guys from the bad guys is important. I know its reactive...but it will make the responding officers job easier.

Doing away with the 4th Amendment would make police jobs easier, too, but it's just silly. So is the notion of police being unable to identify shooters at a school. That's what an investigation is for.

[pujolsfan146]

Yes they should. The trick is finding a teacher or professor that is not too far gone liberally to want to arm his or herself.

[Erik]

"Absolutely, as long as it's voluntary, and they pass a required training/qualification course."

Agreed.

[-Erik-]

Yes they should. The trick is finding a teacher or professor that is not too far gone liberally to want to arm his or herself.

Depends on the part of the country you are in. I could see this being a no biggie open carry esque type thing in many parts of the country.

....And a holy god lock down the school and call in Seal Team Six because one of our teachers has a gun type things in other parts.

[asullivan]

Yes they should. The trick is finding a teacher or professor that is not too far gone liberally to want to arm his or herself.

You rang Officer?

"Absolutely, as long as it's voluntary, and they pass a required training/qualification course."

Agreed.

Nobody and I mean Nobody is gunna barge into my classroom with intent to maim or kill my students. If "it" attempts such, The responding Officers is gunna' know exactly where and whom the ******* is..cause said ******* is gunna be lay'in down with a .45 cal hole between his two little beady eyes...

As you were.....

[Bearcat357]

Leave the policing to the police.

My sister teaches in a large/rural school (1500 kids in the HS). They have no SRO there.....at all.

I'd much rather her packing and taking some punk kid out.....then being a hero and dying.... thus having me go to to her funeral.....

Just me....

[M-11]

When I was in high school there were always about a dozen shotguns and and cases of 1 ounce slug in the Shop Teachers office.

The Hunting club checked our stuff in before school.

I would bet Mr Bangle, the Shop teacher/Korean War Marine would have probably intervened in the case of an active shooter.

Things have changed, and I am saddened that there is no such place for my son to go to school anymore.

M-11

[JustAJ]

Absolutely, as long as it's voluntary, and they pass a required training/qualification course.

Training should be absolutely mandatory, but I whole heartedly agree that teachers should be allowed to carry. This is, of course, assuming they are not prohibited from owning a gun.

I think it will only compound the problem. Leave the policing to the police.

It's tough to argue that point, because it is valid. The problem is time. In hte time it takes for units to repsond to the location, coordinate the plan and execute, a lot of people could end up dead or wounded that otherwise may not have been. The police can't be everywhere at once, and having a trained and armed teacher on the spot I think would help out. I'm not advocating that they actively pursue the shooter, but it beats not being armed if the BG comes into the classroom.

WTSHTF- identifying the good guys from the bad guys is important. I know its reactive...but it will make the responding officers job easier..

I don't think it would be as hard as it may seem. An active shooter would probably be noncompliant and fire at responding officers. Of course, this is where training the teachers would be critical - know when to drop the gun.

[Johnny-Boy]

Teachers would have to have proper training in order to carry such a weapon. I just worry that the weapon would fall into the wrong hands.

[Sgt. Slaughter]

Training...

It's a reality that a good many departments would significantly reduce training expenditures in order to keep as many officers on the street or at their desks performing work duties as opposed to training.

Training is generally done for two major fiscal reasons:

1. To avoid or mitigate liability in relation to 'deliberate indifference' for failure to train, and;

2. Because it is a requirement of the insurance carrier.

Now, since police carry firearms for 40 hours a week all year long, many people feel officers are adequately trained in firearms. However, law enforcement shootings often post abysmal statistics for the ratio of shots fired to hits on target. This from people who have state-mandated courses they must pass which may involve shooting for score, judgmental (shoot/no-shoot) scenarios and night shoots. This is all in addition to the constant law enforcement exposure to extremely stressful situations which can somewhat inoculate the officer to some of the physiological responses to stress: foot pursuits, car chases, physical fights, overwhelming number of citizens to officers at calls, etc.

Now.

What kind of "training" would make you warm and fuzzy when we talk about a school district employee being allowed to access a weapon on school grounds?

[1042 Trooper]

My wife just retired after 21 years of teaching - and ALWAYS had somethin' in her purse. Toward the end they actually came up with a written policy against firearms but nothing about a taser, so she carried that and pepper spray for the last few years.

[11b101abn]

Im for it. The stipulation is that the teacher is not to go hunting, but remain w/ the class and defend them.

[westside popo]

Heck yeah! As an incentive give armed teachers / professors 3 - 5% salary increase and a gun stipend every month so they can afford ammo, optics and holsters to match their outfits.

[JustAJ]

What kind of "training" would make you warm and fuzzy when we talk about a school district employee being allowed to access a weapon on school grounds?

That's a very good question and a good point. And while I couldn't answer the question, since I am not an expert, I think it illustrates a much better perspective on the issue. By that I mean you pose a very good question, rather than the naysayers who reject the idea out of hand using the flawed argument that teachers carrying will reuslt in even more loss of life.