Columbine survivor introduces bill to expand concealed-carry in schools
129 replies, posted
[QUOTE=catbarf;53149070]I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to ask. Could you rephrase?[/QUOTE]
I meant guns
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53148958]Then wouldn't a possible solution still be country wide less guns, not more?[/QUOTE]
That would not even remotely stop adult shooters from obtsining firearms. Yes, if you were to evaporate all guns then sure but that's not reality.
[editline]21st February 2018[/editline]
[QUOTE=catbarf;53148627]I'm sorry Riller, but this is factually completely wrong. Fort Hood, as well as most military bases, are gun-free zones where servicemen are not armed. The only people armed on a domestic base are MPs, and there are not a whole lot of them. The Fort Hood shooting was particularly deadly because there weren't any MPs nearby to respond. Trained military personnel or not (and let's be real, most of the people on-base have gone through Basic and that's it for their combat training), if you're unarmed there's not much you can do to defend yourself.
Those green-on-blue attacks in Afghanistan? Look up the body counts on those. There are no jihadi wannabes reaching double-digit body counts in an environment where every one of their would-be victims is an armed and trained combatant. It may not stop or fully deter the attacks, but it sure as hell limits their lethality.
As for deterrence, here in the US at least, we have direct evidence that spree shooters deliberately target areas where nobody is armed- look at the Aurora theater shooting, which took place in the one theater for miles that bans concealed carry, or the comparative lack of shootings on college campuses that allow concealed carry. Over and over and over again we see mass shootings taking place in gun-free zones.
I'm not saying any of this to justify arming teachers en masse, which I think is a horrendously terrible idea. Concealed carry for teachers who already have gone to the effort of getting a permit and demonstrating competence, maybe. But at least get the facts right- the idea that the presence of guns or lack thereof has no effect whatsoever on mass shootings is clearly wrong from even a cursory glance at the targets and outcomes of mass shootings.[/QUOTE]
I think that comparing the training that cc licensed folks have to militsrt personell is a very bad idea. The training one typically gets in relation to people is "only point your weapon at what you intend to destroy" which works well enough for the stereotypical case of being assaulted while alone... But somebody with a gun in a massive panic scenario like a school shooting would be way more likely to harm than to help unless they regularly did simulations which would be a super unreasonable expectation.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;53147982]Do you know how astronomically unlikely that is? There are cops in a bunch of schools already, what if a kid gets a hold of the cop's gun? Guess we shouldn't have cops in schools then.[/QUOTE]
Cops are trained on what to do if someone reaches for their weapon. We don't even give our teachers money for fucking pencils, but you think we'll train our teachers for hand to hand altercations? And people wonder why America has a gun problem.
[QUOTE=Paramud;53149574]Cops are trained on what to do if someone reaches for their weapon. We don't even give our teachers money for fucking pencils, but you think we'll train our teachers for hand to hand altercations? And people wonder why America has a gun problem.[/QUOTE]
My understanding of the legislation is that it lets teachers who got a license on their own time and money carry their firearm in the school, which means schools wouldn't have to pay much, if it at all. I don't know how likely a student stealing a weapon off a teacher and going on a shooting spree is. Would imagine that anyone who wanted to shoot up a school would simply bring a gun from outside. Certainly much less risky.
Several states already let teachers (and students, in college) conceal carry on campus. I feel like these concerns about people accidentally shooting students/teachers, or having their gun stolen, or other worst-case-scenarios would be reported more frequently.
[QUOTE=phygon;53149359]That would not even remotely stop adult shooters from obtsining firearms. Yes, if you were to evaporate all guns then sure but that's not reality.
[editline]21st February 2018[/editline]
I think that comparing the training that cc licensed folks have to militsrt personell is a very bad idea. The training one typically gets in relation to people is "only point your weapon at what you intend to destroy" which works well enough for the stereotypical case of being assaulted while alone... But somebody with a gun in a massive panic scenario like a school shooting would be way more likely to harm than to help unless they regularly did simulations which would be a super unreasonable expectation.[/QUOTE]
It would make it harder
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53149658]It would make it harder[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://silkroad7rn2puhj.onion/"]Not really.[/URL]
[QUOTE=Paramud;53149574]Cops are trained on what to do if someone reaches for their weapon. We don't even give our teachers money for fucking pencils, but you think we'll train our teachers for hand to hand altercations? And people wonder why America has a gun problem.[/QUOTE]
Uhh, we shoot them if they reach for a weapon. That is pretty much the end of training.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;53149969]i surely cannot see any issue with teachers being trained to shoot at kids reaching for items in a building full of students often reaching into backpacks for items[/QUOTE]
Don't act like that's how it would be. Police are trained in that specific manner because of all the uncertainty in their line of work, where they are tasked with confronting dangerous individuals on a daily basis. On top of that police have much more extensive legal protections when it comes to use of deadly force. To think that the same type of training would apply is asinine.
If teachers were armed their responsibility is their own students and themselves. Like anyone who isn't a cop their job isn't to go hunt a shooter down, their job would be to protect their students and defend them if need be.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;53149969]i surely cannot see any issue with teachers being trained to shoot at kids reaching for items in a building full of students often reaching into backpacks for items[/QUOTE]
yeah i carry every day and i cant even begin to tell you how many innocent children ive mistakenly gunned down for trying to pull out a cell phone
oh wait yeah i can, 0.
[QUOTE=butre;53150106]yeah i carry every day and i cant even begin to tell you how many innocent children ive mistakenly gunned down for trying to pull out a cell phone
oh wait yeah i can, 0.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53150001]Don't act like that's how it would be. Police are trained in that specific manner because of all the uncertainty in their line of work, where they are tasked with confronting dangerous individuals on a daily basis. On top of that police have much more extensive legal protections when it comes to use of deadly force. To think that the same type of training would apply is asinine.
If teachers were armed their responsibility is their own students and themselves. Like anyone who isn't a cop their job isn't to go hunt a shooter down, their job would be to protect their students and defend them if need be.[/QUOTE]
That example was obviously far-fetched, but in the event of a crisis, similar judgment calls would have to be made by teachers. Teachers who are not truly trained to handle that scenario, and even if they were, certainly wouldn't do enough simulations regularly enough to actually reliably make the right call on pulling the trigger or not in the event of an actual shooting.
Not that they should be expected to. They're educators, not PMC contractors.
[QUOTE=phygon;53150191]That example was obviously far-fetched, but in the event of a crisis, similar judgment calls would have to be made by teachers. Teachers who are not truly trained to handle that scenario, and even if they were, certainly wouldn't do enough simulations regularly enough to actually reliably make the right call on pulling the trigger or not in the event of an actual shooting.
Not that they should be expected to. They're educators, not PMC contractors.[/QUOTE]
most concealed carry holders are better trained than most police.
it's easy, have the teachers hold their ground, and the second someone with a gun who's not a cop comes into the room, shoot them.
[QUOTE=butre;53150212]most concealed carry holders are better trained than most police.
it's easy, have the teachers hold their ground, and the second someone with a gun who's not a cop comes into the room, shoot them.[/QUOTE]
There's a lot more to the situation than that.
How do you hide your students?
How do you deal with students with special needs?
If lockdown happens between classes, how long do you wait for your students if they're out in the hallway?
A lot of educational facilities were not constructed with active shootings in mind. It's not uncommon for classrooms to be open, with modular walls/furniture, and there's often quite a lot of glass. Building specific plans can be made for these scenarios, but inevitably you're going to end up with scenarios where sheltering in place isn't a good option.
Also, which educators do you want to be armed and trained? Are you including graduate students and teaching assistants at universities? It's not that uncommon for undergraduates to shadow or sub in for K12 instructors, and there's an even wider range of training and skill level involved at the pre-K level. Are we including them as well?
What the the legal implications in asking educators to act as a line of defense for their students? Socially, we're now expected to take a bullet for our students, but we're not granted the same sort of legal protections or access to government benefits/resources as public safety officers or first responders when things go south.
Aside from carrying being a massive pain in the ass for me since I work with extremely sensitive equipment that you can't bring metal around, I personally am not opposed to this plan of action. I've sat through a lockdown caused by an active shooter during my undergrad. My instructor was willing to stand in harms way for us, so that's the baseline expectation I've set for myself.
I don't have the time, nor the funds on hand to train and outfit myself for this kind of situation though. I get that my particular situation isn't that bad compared to K12 educators, but it still rubs me the wrong way that you guys are just expecting us to pick up the slack because the rest of society can't figure their shit out.
Educators are now supposed to:
act as social mediators to stop conflict
act as therapists psychologists to figure out which students are troubled
live constantly under public scrutiny for shit like perceived political bias
still figure out how to guide students to build knowledge in the subjects we've been charged to teach
and often make advances in those subjects themselves
And now we're supposed to act as pseudo bodyguards for other people's kids because it's "cheap" or "easy" for us to do so?
[QUOTE=butre;53150212]most concealed carry holders are better trained than most police.
it's easy, have the teachers hold their ground, and the second someone with a gun who's not a cop comes into the room, shoot them.[/QUOTE]
Better trained in firearm handling in terms of raw hours on the range, sure.
Better trained in crisis handling? Fuck no.
[QUOTE=1legmidget;53150280]There's a lot more to the situation than that.
How do you hide your students?
How do you deal with students with special needs?
If lockdown happens between classes, how long do you wait for your students if they're out in the hallway?
A lot of educational facilities were not constructed with active shootings in mind. It's not uncommon for classrooms to be open, with modular walls/furniture, and there's often quite a lot of glass. Building specific plans can be made for these scenarios, but inevitably you're going to end up with scenarios where sheltering in place isn't a good option.
Also, which educators do you want to be armed and trained? Are you including graduate students and teaching assistants at universities? It's not that uncommon for undergraduates to shadow or sub in for K12 instructors, and there's an even wider range of training and skill level involved at the pre-K level. Are we including them as well?
What the the legal implications in asking educators to act as a line of defense for their students? Socially, we're now expected to take a bullet for our students, but we're not granted the same sort of legal protections or access to government benefits/resources as public safety officers or first responders when things go south.
Aside from carrying being a massive pain in the ass for me since I work with extremely sensitive equipment that you can't bring metal around, I personally am not opposed to this plan of action. I've sat through a lockdown caused by an active shooter during my undergrad. My instructor was willing to stand in harms way for us, so that's the baseline expectation I've set for myself.
I don't have the time, nor the funds on hand to train and outfit myself for this kind of situation though. I get that my particular situation isn't that bad compared to K12 educators, but it still rubs me the wrong way that you guys are just expecting us to pick up the slack because the rest of society can't figure their shit out.
Educators are now supposed to:
act as social mediators to stop conflict
act as therapists psychologists to figure out which students are troubled
live constantly under public scrutiny for shit like perceived political bias
still figure out how to guide students to build knowledge in the subjects we've been charged to teach
and often make advances in those subjects themselves
And now we're supposed to act as pseudo bodyguards for other people's kids because it's "cheap" or "easy" for us to do so?[/QUOTE]
obviously every school needs to tailor a good flexible plan to their situation. in my school the sped class was it's own room in the electives building, so in that case theres not much planning that needs to be done. if lockdown happens between classes, everyone just ducks into the nearest open door and whoever is shooting gets dealt with.
any person (not just educators) with a concealed carry permit should be allowed to carry in school. I don't care if it's the janitor or the lunch lady, if they've got a concealed carry permit they've already proven themselves to be sensible regarding guns.
who cares what the legal implications are? were talking about saving lives, not dollars. even then, it'd be the same legal implications as if the sro shot someone.
I'm not expecting educators to pick up the slack, I just want people willing and able to pick up the slack to be allowed to do so.
[editline]22nd February 2018[/editline]
[QUOTE=phygon;53150284]Better trained in firearm handling in terms of raw hours on the range, sure.
Better trained in crisis handling? Fuck no.[/QUOTE]
this post here details the problems with that argument better than I ever could
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;53147982]Do you know how astronomically unlikely that is? There are cops in a bunch of schools already, what if a kid gets a hold of the cop's gun? Guess we shouldn't have cops in schools then. The teacher would be more likely to be killed by lightning on Mars than have a student take a gun concealed on their person, partially because how the fuck are they even going to know where it is, or even if the teacher has one? You seem to be missing the [i]concealed[/i] in concealed-carry.
The gun doesn't whisper things to them in the classroom that will make them more likely to kill people. If the teacher wants to kill their class, a CCW permit is going to have no bearing on that decision. It's worth noting that according to data from Florida and Texas, each with over a million permit holders, [url=https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/2015-Report-from-the-Crime-Prevention-Research-Center-Final.pdf]CCW permit holders are 1/7th as likely as police to commit any kind of felony or misdemeanour.[/url]
This has almost never happened to a CCW holder, unlike a very public incident where [url=https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/02/lapd-officers-who-shot-103-rounds-two-innocent-women-violated-policy/357728/]LAPD SWAT shot 2 women more than 100 times[/url] because they thought the truck they were in was being driven my someone they were on a manhunt for. Police can misidentify the shooter too.
CCW permit holders generally won't take shots that run the risk of hitting something else, most likely because they have to be even more accountable for their shots than police. [url=http://www.sfu.ca/~mauser/papers/women/Law-review-abstract.pdf]Some studies cite numbers that say police are 5.5 times more likely than a CCW permit holder to shoot the wrong person.[/url][/QUOTE]
Another thought that occurred to me is what if one of these teachers is black. Because black dudes have been shot for holding [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_John_Crawford_III]what looks like a gun[/url] on a [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_Rice]couple of occasions[/url], once in a case where they [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Philando_Castile]did actually have a gun[/url] but had no intention of using it. I don't know how statistically common these sorts of shootings are but uhh I think you need to be aware of whatever the consequences of your policy decisions may be.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;53150571]Another thought that occurred to me is what if one of these teachers is black. Because black dudes have been shot for holding [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_John_Crawford_III]what looks like a gun[/url] on a [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_Rice]couple of occasions[/url], once in a case where they [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Philando_Castile]did actually have a gun[/url] but had no intention of using it. I don't know how statistically common these sorts of shootings are but uhh I think you need to be aware of whatever the consequences of your policy decisions may be.[/QUOTE]
philando castile's killing was a travesty and a complete failure on the police's part but the first two had people waving around actual fake guns and not just something that just looks like a gun. then with those fake guns in their hands they didn't comply with police.
[QUOTE=butre;53150583]philando castile's killing was a travesty and a complete failure on the police's part but the first two had people waving around actual fake guns and not just something that just looks like a gun. then with those fake guns in their hands they didn't comply with police.[/QUOTE]
Tamir Rice was 12 years old dude.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;53150587]Tamir Rice was 12 years old dude.[/QUOTE]
and he was holding what basically amounts to a full size replica of a real gun, and pulled it on the cop. he would have been shot for that whether he was 8 feet tall and blacker than wesley snipes in a cave or 3 feet tall and roughly the color of cool whip
[QUOTE=phygon;53150191]That example was obviously far-fetched, but in the event of a crisis, similar judgment calls would have to be made by teachers. Teachers who are not truly trained to handle that scenario, and even if they were, certainly wouldn't do enough simulations regularly enough to actually reliably make the right call on pulling the trigger or not in the event of an actual shooting.
Not that they should be expected to. They're educators, not PMC contractors.[/QUOTE]
The same can be said about cops, and the same can be said about green soldiers. No one knows how they are going to respond to an active shooter scenario, or rather someone trying to directly kill you.
Training gives you the tools you need to be able to do things in that kind of situation, but it does not dictate your actual actions.
When you find yourself in a life or death situation a number of things happen to you physically; your body gets an adrenaline dump, your fine motor skills go to shit, you get tunnel vision. Training is designed to help you do certain tasks when that happens, but it does not help how you as an individual respond. That comes down to an individuals mindset and will, something that is difficult to determin from training.
I've watched fully trained Marines freeze in fear and confusion, and I've seen regular people savagely attack aggressors without stopping for a moment. Mindset is just as important, if not more important, when dealing with these kinds of situations. Every bit of training someone can get helps, but not being prepared mentally for the sort of situation means all the training in the world is useless
[QUOTE=butre;53150594]and he was holding what basically amounts to a full size replica of a real gun, and pulled it on the cop. [/QUOTE]
Kids these days, they don't learn trigger discipline in elementary school at all! what's the point of even going to school if they don't train you for the world!
[URL="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns/u-s-students-protest-over-gun-laws-trump-considers-arming-teachers-idUSKCN1G51QY"]Trump considers arming teachers[/URL]
[QUOTE]“If you had a teacher ... who was adept at firearms, they could very well end the attack very quickly,” he said, while acknowledging the proposal was controversial. Some of the meeting participants indicated support. Others were opposed. [/QUOTE]
Article talks about other gun control measures being considered by Trump. I will actually laugh if he passes more regulations than Obama did :v:
So whats to prevent teachers from abusing something like this? You already have some teachers abusing students already before they get caught and sentenced to jail, if anything even happens to them.
[url]http://www.fox25boston.com/news/25-investigates-teachers-cited-for-abuse-not-always-banned-from-classroom/641173168[/url]
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53150612]The same can be said about cops, and the same can be said about green soldiers. No one knows how they are going to respond to an active shooter scenario, or rather someone trying to directly kill you.
Training gives you the tools you need to be able to do things in that kind of situation, but it does not dictate your actual actions.
When you find yourself in a life or death situation a number of things happen to you physically; your body gets an adrenaline dump, your fine motor skills go to shit, you get tunnel vision. Training is designed to help you do certain tasks when that happens, but it does not help how you as an individual respond. That comes down to an individuals mindset and will, something that is difficult to determin from training.
I've watched fully trained Marines freeze in fear and confusion, and I've seen regular people savagely attack aggressors without stopping for a moment. Mindset is just as important, if not more important, when dealing with these kinds of situations. Every bit of training someone can get helps, but not being prepared mentally for the sort of situation means all the training in the world is useless[/QUOTE]
It's ridiculous that this is the conversation we are having about fucking teachers who went to school just to teach kids. Now while being underpaid and underprepared and undersupplied and over utilized, they need to learn how to engage in a shootout surrounded by children.
Just unfuck your goddamn country, stop acting like going even further in the main difference between yours and all the others which don't have this issue is going to solve anything.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;53148109]I feel like there's a case to be made to prevent domestic abusers from owning guns but yeah bureaucracy totally fucked up there.[/QUOTE]
It wasn't about a domestic abuser using a gun.
He used a knife to kill her.
[QUOTE=dragoffire;53150936]So whats to prevent teachers from abusing something like this? You already have some teachers abusing students already before they get caught and sentenced to jail, if anything even happens to them.
[url]http://www.fox25boston.com/news/25-investigates-teachers-cited-for-abuse-not-always-banned-from-classroom/641173168[/url][/QUOTE]
The same can be literally said about anyone and anything. What if cops decide they want to abuse their power? Many already have, and that's something that pops up all the time.
And what's stopping then from doing it now? Barring guns from schools doesn't create a magical shield that evaporates guns that touch it around the building. If teachers wanted to use guns to abuse students they already have that as an option.
[QUOTE=Tigster;53151219]It's ridiculous that this is the conversation we are having about fucking teachers who went to school just to teach kids. Now while being underpaid and underprepared and undersupplied and over utilized, they need to learn how to engage in a shootout surrounded by children.[/QUOTE]
No one said every teacher in the country had to become super soldiers to be teachers. The whole point is to give the option to teachers who would wish to carry the option to do so. Many people who already carry have gone through training, and are already spending their own time and money to continue training on their own for themselves. Giving teachers the option now allows them to extend that training and experience in being able to defend their students if need be.
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53151700]And what's stopping then from doing it now? Barring guns from schools doesn't create a magical shield that evaporates guns that touch it around the building. If teachers wanted to use guns to abuse students they already have that as an option.[/QUOTE]
So we should make it easier for them by allowing them to bring the guns directly into the school. Ballsy, I like it.
[QUOTE=Paramud;53152055]So we should make it easier for them by allowing them to bring the guns directly into the school. Ballsy, I like it.[/QUOTE]
This is a silly post and you know it. Come on.
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53151700]The same can be literally said about anyone and anything. What if cops decide they want to abuse their power? Many already have, and that's something that pops up all the time.
And what's stopping then from doing it now? Barring guns from schools doesn't create a magical shield that evaporates guns that touch it around the building. If teachers wanted to use guns to abuse students they already have that as an option.
[/QUOTE]
Your right, but generally if a teacher bought a gun to school today, they would get intro trouble. If that wasn't the case why is there a big debate over allowing teacher to bring weapons in or have concealed carry? When I see news about teachers abusing students, it generally never involves a gun. If allowing teacher to bring in guns or have conceal carry does happen, there is gonna be abuse related to teacher threatening to shoot a student or something, because as you said, many have abuse their power before and it pops up all the time.
[QUOTE=dragoffire;53152119]Your right, but generally if a teacher bought a gun to school today, they would get intro trouble. If that wasn't the case why is there a big debate over allowing teacher to bring weapons in or have concealed carry? When I see news about teachers abusing students, it generally never involves a gun. If allowing teacher to bring in guns or have conceal carry does happen, there is gonna be abuse related to teacher threatening to shoot a student or something, because as you said, many have abuse their power before and it pops up all the time.[/QUOTE]
And by having or not having a gun that makes threats any different? Your implying that the words "I'm going to kill you with a gun" carries more weight than "I'm going to kill you". You're concerns with exploitation are valid, but those concerns remain literally the same as they currently are.
As I said, we have no problem trusting police with a firearm even though they're much more likely to use it in crimes and violence than a person with a CCW, as posted on the previous page.
Basically what I'm hearing is a bunch of what ifs, what ifs that are literally already applicable.
Your essentially using the same argument evangelicals use when trying to keep transgenders from using the bathroom of their choosing. Being transgender doesn't make you want to exploit children, just as a firearm doesnt make you more inclined to exploit children. You are literally nitpicking something that is already a very rare occurrence in of itself.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.