South Dakota governor signs bill allowing teachers to carry guns - Polidicks

[QUOTE]PIERRE, S.D. — South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard has signed a bill allowing the state's school districts to arm teachers and other personnel with guns. Supporters say the so-called sentinels could help prevent tragedies such as the Connecticut school shooting in December. Representatives of school boards, school administrators and teachers opposed the bill, saying it could make schools more dangerous, lead to accidental shootings and put guns in the hands of people who are not adequately trained to shoot in emergency situations.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130308/us-xgr-armed-schools/?utm_hp_ref=media[/URL] [editline]now[/editline] woo go my state. totally not sarcasm [editline]now[/editline] Well maybe this was a good idea, two years ago a local school was locked down after a student threatened to kill a teacher. He fled the school and was later found confessing to a priest with a AR-15 in his truck

Just a reminder, if you turn this into another gun control argument you're gonna get banned for derailing.

As a teacher, this makes me happy. I'm not from South Dakota, or the U.S. at all, but working at a school that previously has been the target of a gas attack and which handles a lot of mentally unstable or challenged children; I would very much enjoy to have the means to protect the little ones.

Will they be part of the newly formed hue and cry?

[QUOTE=creative;39844720] Well maybe this was a good idea, two years ago a local school was locked down after a student threatened to kill a teacher. He fled the school and was later found confessing to a priest with a AR-15 in his truck[/QUOTE] How was he found? I'm pretty sure it's illegal for priests to snitch on people confessing to them, no matter the confession. Excluding intentions to commit murder, but sounds like he was past the intentions-stage and into the regret-state.

I personally have to applaud South Dakota for this. As long as the proper precautions are taken, e.g. not using it for show and tell, proper lock box, the usual gun safety.

[QUOTE=Riller;39844831]How was he found? I'm pretty sure it's illegal for priests to snitch on people confessing to them, no matter the confession. Excluding intentions to commit murder, but sounds like he was past the intentions-stage and into the regret-state.[/QUOTE] He wasn't going to him as a confessions type deal, but rather he needed someone to talk to. He was found because they found his truck, he never really got into trouble. Maybe some fines but he certainly wasn't in jail

Yeah, give the overly stressed teachers who are regularly getting bullied by their own students the right of carrying a gun in a room filled with those same students. How about you fix the shitty education of your youth instead of tossing guns at threatened people in hope that things fix themselves.

so is it okay if i think this is a terrible idea?

Remember that teachers are not being forced to bring in a gun. Only those that feel comfortable will and we need that last line of defense in our schools. The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. When you're sitting in your classroom with 30 students and you start to hear gunfire getting closer and closer to your classroom, you are the one and only thing that could possibly prevent any harm coming to your students. I would rather have my child in a classroom where the teacher sits and waits, shakily pointing their gun at the door having never fired it more than once when they purchased it. Without that gun they are powerless to stop an armed intruder from entering. With that gun they at least stand a chance to try and save the lives of innocent children.

[QUOTE=Smoot;39844941]The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.[/QUOTE] When you're using the phrases "good guy" and "bad guy" seriously, you should probably stop and re-evaluate what you're saying; what you're doing is oversimplifying things to saturday morning cartoon levels.

[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;39845090]When you're using the phrases "good guy" and "bad guy" seriously, you should probably stop and re-evaluate what you're saying; what you're doing is oversimplifying things to saturday morning cartoon levels.[/QUOTE] What is there to NOT simplify? If someone unauthorized on campus is wandering around with a gun, it's safe to assume he's a "bad guy", right?

[QUOTE=Smoot;39844941]Remember that teachers are not being forced to bring in a gun. Only those that feel comfortable will and we need that last line of defense in our schools. The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. When you're sitting in your classroom with 30 students and you start to hear gunfire getting closer and closer to your classroom, you are the one and only thing that could possibly prevent any harm coming to your students. I would rather have my child in a classroom where the teacher sits and waits, shakily pointing their gun at the door having never fired it more than once when they purchased it. Without that gun they are powerless to stop an armed intruder from entering. With that gun they at least stand a chance to try and save the lives of innocent children.[/QUOTE] Looks like we're going to see more planned out gas attacks on schools now with hydrogen cyanide and such, rather than shootings. I wouldn't be surprised, it would make a lot of sense for a would be gunman to gas the kids instead of just shooting them. You can kill a chemical with bullets.

[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;39845090]When you're using the phrases "good guy" and "bad guy" seriously, you should probably stop and re-evaluate what you're saying; what you're doing is oversimplifying things to saturday morning cartoon levels.[/QUOTE] Person intending harm against the people = bad guy Person stopping that harm = good guy ??? Are you saying we have to stop and have an existential crisis before pulling the trigger?

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;39844877]Yeah, give the overly stressed teachers who are regularly getting bullied by their own students the right of carrying a gun in a room filled with those same students. How about you fix the shitty education of your youth instead of tossing guns at threatened people in hope that things fix themselves.[/QUOTE] Are you saying teachers are going to be shooting their students? How does that make any sense?

[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;39845090]When you're using the phrases "good guy" and "bad guy" seriously, you should probably stop and re-evaluate what you're saying; what you're doing is oversimplifying things to saturday morning cartoon levels.[/QUOTE] What would you rather them be called? "The perpetrator" and "the hero of the day"?

There needs to be some kind of release of liability or I don't see any teacher(no sane ones anyways) firing a gun in a school. Too much could go wrong. All it would take is a stray round to hit a kid and all hell would break loose on that teacher.

I think its funny how some people aren't understanding this bill. This thing isn't saying "YOU, TEACHER, YOU HAVE A GUN NOW. TRY NOT TO HIT THE KIDS" Its saying "YOU, TEACHER, IF YOU [I]SO DESIRE*[/I] YOU CAN HAVE A FIREARM ON THE PREMISES" *likely requiring further background checks and regulation

[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39845610]I think its funny how some people aren't understanding this bill. This thing isn't saying "YOU, TEACHER, YOU HAVE A GUN NOW. TRY NOT TO HIT THE KIDS" Its saying "YOU, TEACHER, IF YOU [I]SO DESIRE*[/I] YOU CAN HAVE A FIREARM ON THE PREMISES" *likely requiring further background checks and regulation[/QUOTE] I'd rather they do something else instead of go "let's put a sticky plaster on, that'll solve things".

[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39845610]I think its funny how some people aren't understanding this bill. This thing isn't saying "YOU, TEACHER, YOU HAVE A GUN NOW. TRY NOT TO HIT THE KIDS" Its saying "YOU, TEACHER, IF YOU [I]SO DESIRE*[/I] YOU CAN HAVE A FIREARM ON THE PREMISES" *likely requiring further background checks and regulation[/QUOTE] the fact that people assume that bills like these are designed to hand guns out to teachers instead of just, y'know, give them the option, is gross

The only problem I have with this is that I can't count how often students stole test answers from teachers, and a gun could possibly be stolen just as easily. If I didn't see teachers break code and rules all the time, I wouldn't be worried. I just don't know if we can trust them to follow proper safety guidelines. But otherwise, I'm glad SD teachers now have a chance to protect themselves and their students.

[QUOTE=CoalTen;39845862]The only problem I have with this is that I can't count how often students stole test answers from teachers, and a gun could possibly be stolen just as easily. If I didn't see teachers break code and rules all the time, I wouldn't be worried. I just don't know if we can trust them to follow proper safety guidelines. But otherwise, I'm glad SD teachers now have a chance to protect themselves and their students.[/QUOTE] not that it isn't possible, but kids would have to be [I]really[/I] stupid to steal a teachers' gun

It can't be acceptable for a school to be afraid that someone should come and fire off a gun in the school. The entire situation is so absurd, how did it even get this far? [editline]8th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Protocol7;39845938]not that it isn't possible, but kids would have to be [I]really[/I] stupid to steal a teachers' gun[/QUOTE] I'm fairly certain there will be a few dumb ones that would consider it for the publicity

I'm not really sure about how I feel about this, I'm torn between the teachers needing to protect students, and students and perhaps mentally unstable teachers having guns in a crowded room with doors that can be easily blocked. There should at least be some requirements similar to having a concealed weapons license, definitely some required training.

[QUOTE=CoalTen;39845862]The only problem I have with this is that I can't count how often students stole test answers from teachers, and a gun could possibly be stolen just as easily. If I didn't see teachers break code and rules all the time, I wouldn't be worried. I just don't know if we can trust them to follow proper safety guidelines. But otherwise, I'm glad SD teachers now have a chance to protect themselves and their students.[/QUOTE] If a teacher is properly practicing concealed carry it won't even be visible, and even if visible won't be easily removed. Plenty of people work with concealed firearms and them being stolen is a very minor risk. Alternatively, if the weapon is locked up and intended to be retrieved in case of emergency, then it's just a matter of keeping a key.

I'm glad I live in a country where this has never been a consideration.

They're undercover Warehouse 13 agents, obviously.

This is pointless. Either it will get stolen by a disgruntled kid or it will have to be locked away to the point of being useless in an emergency.

[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39845610]I think its funny how some people aren't understanding this bill. This thing isn't saying "YOU, TEACHER, YOU HAVE A GUN NOW. TRY NOT TO HIT THE KIDS" Its saying "YOU, TEACHER, IF YOU [I]SO DESIRE*[/I] YOU CAN HAVE A FIREARM ON THE PREMISES" *likely requiring further background checks and regulation[/QUOTE] It's a bit disingenuous to play it off like this is about giving school personnel the option to have firearms on the premises, and that's all. What reason is there to go out of their(lawmakers) way to make a law for this? Obviously to arm school personnel so they can provide emergency response in the event they need to defend lives. What kind of idiot tries to say this about allowing the teachers to possess weapons without also accounting for the fact that unless the teachers are willing to FIRE those weapons then the weapons are useless?

[QUOTE=someguywithagun;39846560]I'm not really sure about how I feel about this, I'm torn between the teachers needing to protect students, and students and perhaps mentally unstable teachers having guns in a crowded room with doors that can be easily blocked. There should at least be some requirements similar to having a concealed weapons license, definitely some required training.[/QUOTE] If a teacher is mentally unstable, should they be dealing with large groups kids at all? If a teacher is prone to violence against their students I'd be just as worried about a rowdy student being beaten with a chair by a teacher that's had enough. Additionally, nobody is going to be issued weapons, all this is going to do is allow those who already legally carry their own weapons to do so while teaching so a CC license is pretty much a prerequisite to carrying in the school. The teacher would still be required to be in control of their weapon at all times, no leaving it in a desk drawer or anything like that. [QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;39847090]It's a bit disingenuous to play it off like this is about giving school personnel the option to have firearms on the premises, and that's all. What reason is there to go out of their(lawmakers) way to make a law for this? Obviously to arm school personnel so they can provide emergency response in the event they need to defend lives. What kind of idiot tries to say this about allowing the teachers to possess weapons without also accounting for the fact that unless the teachers are willing to FIRE those weapons then the weapons are useless?[/QUOTE] Nobody is being armed, they're being permitted to carry a weapon, nothing says a teacher has to or even should carry a gun, it's completely their choice. So what if they're willing to fire their weapons? Nobody goes through the trouble of getting a CC license unless they intend to use it for defense.