The Hell? Another mass shooting

Well I certainly don't support forcing teachers to carry.

Oh, and do you have any evidence of CCW permit holders losing control of their firearm?

How about teachers that want to concealed carry can carry? This way it's hit-or-miss (no pun intended) as to which teachers might stop you the maniac in their tracks, and which ones won't?

Yup, what got me to arguing the line I'm arguing is the "in case of emergency, break glass" comment I made elsewhere. I'm pretty sure in these school shootings it isn't like someone brings their disturbed cousin to show-and-tell and he whips out a gun. Unless schools have changed radically from when I was in school, they're compartmentalized--lots of empty hallways with classrooms with doors on them that the students are in.

A teacher could have a locked desk drawer that would be secure enough for the day (they could either have an armory/safe in the school office or have teachers bring their gun home at the end of the day) and carry the key on their person at all times. Then if they hear shots or someone comes on the intercom and says Shit Just Got Real, they open the drawer, get the kids in a safe position, and then take up a covered/concealed position with a line on the door. That gives them the drop on anyone entering, gives them time to identify them and judge their intentions. It would still be like shooting fish in a barrel, just the other way around. Yes you'd still have some casualties, but it would be like, a couple adults and maybe a couple kids and then the shooter would be dead or incapacitated.

All that said, I agree, I don't want Dayton anywhere near a gun either.

So now the shooter holds the class hostage until the teacher unlocks the gun safe, and then murders them all anyway.

What I don't understand is how the shooter is supposed to know some of the teachers might be carrying. It's not really a deterrent unless its advertised that some teachers are in fact armed.

That he was running low on bullets and suicidal.

Well when I got my Florida CCW the paperwork made the point of saying that "you are not law enforcement" (paraphrasing that). I'm pretty sure most other states make the same point to CCW holders that they are not law enforcement nor are should they be acting in the role of law enforcement.

You should only being clearing the holster when you are in imminent danger (or someone near you is) of great bodily harm.

So in a mall shooting a CCW person should be moving for the exits with the rest of the people unless he is directly near the shooter. And by directly near I mean practically on top of the shooters location. No one with a CCW should be running towards an active shooter area.

Your scenario is possible but a little far fetched. Almost comical in its chain of events.

Once it's a standard school practice (nationally if not state) and the public is well aware that a percentage of staff are armed, it would be a great deterrent.

So now we have a situation where the parents are aware that these guns will be on campus. Do you expect none of them to raise a stink about that? Are we going to force these students into schools with guns against their parents' wishes? If I had a kid and that happened, I'd be pulling him out of school.

A police officer?

Two to four weeks depending on the Academy. And that's not 2 to 4 weeks of 8 hours a day 40 hours a week of range time. When you break it down you might have actually spent about 40-50 hours learning guns and training scenarios.

Remember guys the state sets the "bare" minimum standard for training law enforcement and I know of no academy that says, "well the state says we need 40 hours of instruction but what the heck we are going to give them 100 hours!" Not going to happen in today's budget conscious world.

Oh, and I forgot. Not knowing who might be armed works pretty good as a deterrent for store owners. Most robbers hit chain convenience stores (like Circle K for example) because they know company policy is no guns for employees.

Mom + Pop stores don't play that shit, and in the vast majority of cases the robbers are shot dead, game over.

Thus word seems to be spreading, and few robbers dare attempt a privately owned store, especially if old people run it, because they all have shooting experience and will not hesitate to kill them. :santa_ok:

Of course. My objection is lumping truly innocent children in with criminals. It's a cheap appeal to emotionalism that the Brady campaign and others on the left have used for the better part of 20 years.

Another thing.

How do you "deter" people who are suicidal in the first place? It has been suggested that these kinds of murderers are in fact committing mass murders because the KNOW it will provoke a lethal police response so that if they get cold feet about committing suicide the police will do the job for them.

Has it occurred to anyone that knowing that school personnel are armed might actually ATTRACT homicidal/suicidal shooters who want to die in a blaze of glory?

The the possible excitement of dying in a movie esque blazing shootout might look challenging or attractive to them.

That's an easy answer: You're wrong. And whoever suggested that killers want a massive police response is wrong too. Otherwise killers would just go to the nearest police station and start shooting or simply attack the nearest officer and wait for his backup to arrive.

Why do mass shootings take place in gun free zones? Because the killer wants to kill as many people as he can before he kills himself or gets popped by the police.

The killers are smart enough to know that they are not a T-800 who can rampage through a police station.

The killers are looking for easy soft targets.

The killers understand no one will remember a guy who killed two people before getting shot himself in some mall but that everyone will remember shooting dead 20 kids and six adults.

It's about body count and not going out in a blaze of glory.

I can't imagine, personally, being able to open a safe in a hurry under imminent threat of swift and painful death. And if the shooter doesn't make any noise until he's standing in the classroom doorway, everyone is fucked.

Yet you cannot deny that the shooter dying is in fact his ultimate goal. Which of course makes him suicidal.

As someone noted on the news the day after the shooting.

"You can't even keep the president safe from a killer that is truly suicidal".

Indeed! If I had buttons instead of a zipper I'd piss myself on a daily basis.
Having a gun in a safe is worthless IMO.

I didn't deny it you silly fool.

In fact let me copy and paste it so you can read it yet again:

"before he kills himself or gets popped by the police."

Yes they want to die. They just want to have the HUGE body count before they die. They want targets that offer little resistance.

BTW, my wife talks to teachers on the phone every day, dealing with supply orders and invoice questions. From the stories she tells me, yeah, there are teachers out there you wouldn't want responsible for adjusting a thermostat, much less carrying a gun.

But volunteers, two or three per school, vetted and trained...

Or even better then volunteers:

Paid guards who have the skill and training to use a rifle and handgun to eliminate or suppress an active shooter until back up arrives.

Don't need teachers.

(Incidentally there are also law enforcement officers out there you don't want adjusting the thermostat either much less them having a gun.... )

Like I said, either you carry, or you lock it in a safe. If a gun is going to be on school premises, I would prefer for it to be on a trained person as well.

But, I know of a couple incidents where a homeowner heard someone breaking to their house, they went to a gun safe, punched in code, retrieved weapon, chambered a round, and confronted the perp. No shots were fired either.

So it has happened.

But like you said, probably not likely that it works.

The interesting thing here is that we have no problem with air marshals on planes these days, and the danger there is a lot greater.

If a teacher volunteers, and is properly trained, I would have zero problem if they carried on school grounds. In fact I would prefer it. But hey, call me crazy.

Women are to blame for the shooting, says assgasket.

I really don't get your line of reasoning. One thing this incident should have made clear to you is that if someone wants to do your child harm, the school gun policy is not going to stop that from happening.

Then that "someone" was an idiot. If that was true, the president would have been assassinated long since. There are plenty of terrorists willing to die in the act who would love to take out the POTUS. The fact that it hasn't happened shows that you can keep the president safe, even from suicidal killers.

Now, if that someone had said "You can't even keep the president 100% safe" that would technically be true. But the pecentage is close enough to 100% that, despite all the suicidal terrorists who would love to do it, it hasn't happened.

You are working yourself up into paranoid hysteria because you are scared of guns, period. Personally, I don't much like guns either (never owned one, can't see myself ever owning one, have only fired maybe a half dozen shots in my life...) but I feel much safer with competent armed people around than with only the possibility of armed crazies around.

What's the problem with a permit holding teacher arrying if they chose to do so? Permit holders generally aren't amateurs and many spend far more range time than the cops do. Aenea probably does.

Tennessee's permit class doesn't teach you how to shoot. They test that you are competent with a weapon. You need to already know how to shoot when you go in there.

The classroom portion teaches when you can shoot, but they also spend a fair portion of time on when you can't shoot. They also spend some time teaching the legal ramifications of taking the shot if you're right or wrong. My instructor drilled it into us, "You are legally, morally, and financially responsible for every round that leaves your weapon." So permit holders don't go into this thing blind if they paid any attention in class.

Absolutely. Unless a teacher happens to have the necessary training and wants to work as a backup. But since teachers could not be carrying loading weapons on their person (too many risks), a quick initial response could come only from someone who has nothing to do but patrol, gun at ready. Preferably with a second such person. (In airports, over here at least, they are always by threes, even.) A teacher who has the training and could (relatively) quickly gain access to a weapon could only work as back-up, from having heard (shots or PA) that there is an ongoing threat.

Most people, including a bunch on here(me too) have no clue what training is involved in order to get a CCW permit.

Ignorance is bliss.

Some states require considerable training, others require none.

But before you worry too much about someone being hurt because of a citizen being inadequately trained, ALL jurisdictions require that a threat exist before the CCW holder draws his/her weapon. In other words, a CCW holder's gun won't come into play unless someone is already under threat of injury or death.

Exactly. I know plenty of teachers who have had to break up fights by getting in between two angry teenagers and physically separating them. And people think it'd be a good idea for that teacher to have a gun in his jacket or on his hip where one of said angry, volatile kids can grab it?

Sorry but no. Teaching evolution or sex ed is a far cry away from having a gun on campus.