Texas school district letting teachers carry guns

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JM Aggie08

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
8,223
842
136
this wouldn't be happening if parents knew how to raise their kids.

from experience with some of the schools around here, i can't blame them.
 

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
46
91
Originally posted by: classy
Something is wrong with allowing teachers to bring guns to school. We have teachers having sex with students through coersion now, next it will be through the threat of a gun. Put in metal detectors, but for god sakes not allow teachers to use guns. I wouldn't allow my child to go to school there. Teachers should be setting an example. If its too dangerous for you to teach without a gun, find another line of work. I don't believe the safety of my child is improved by anyone carrying a gun in school, unless they are police officers.

I don't always agree with classy, but I agree 100% with this. My fiance is a school teacher. If she was to the point where she felt threatened in her line of work, I sure as hell wouldn't want her working there. If you have to bring a gun to your place of work -- a school no less -- to feel safe or gun down a student who may be packing, find another line of work. I swear, this country is going to shit -- we need guns to solve every problem.

And I LOVE to listen to idiots that think that a licensed gun owner is the ANSWER to EVERY school shooting, workplace shooting, bus stabbing, etc.

"If so-in-so had a gun there, they would have been able to diffuse the situation at hand with no problems."

BULLSHIT! I haven't heard one of you fools give a real-life personal account of something like that actually going down [in a place that otherwise would be considered a crime-free environment].
 

Garet Jax

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2000
6,369
0
71
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: grrl
This is seriously messed up.

It's seriously messed up that Teachers haven't been armed all along.

So many deaths would've been prevented over the last decade or so from Columbine to Virginia Tech and everything in between.

It only takes one bullet to take out a shooter but if no one is armed against that shooter he or she can take out as many as they have bullets.

Amazing that so many don't get that until they are staring down the end of a gun barrel and then wished they had a gun.

You're just assuming that arming a teacher is going to give them the ability, nerve and stones to actually do something with the gun. This is just a bad assumption. Shooting is an acquired skill like anything else. You don't practice - you're more likely to be spraying your bullets pseudo-randonly anyways. Could it have prevented the death we've seen at these school shootings - yes. Would it have - who knows?

Besides, putting a handgun (since they won't be able to conceal much more) up against an automatic or semi-automatic machine gun is a losing battle the vast majority of the time.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: Garet Jax
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: grrl
This is seriously messed up.

It's seriously messed up that Teachers haven't been armed all along.

So many deaths would've been prevented over the last decade or so from Columbine to Virginia Tech and everything in between.

It only takes one bullet to take out a shooter but if no one is armed against that shooter he or she can take out as many as they have bullets.

Amazing that so many don't get that until they are staring down the end of a gun barrel and then wished they had a gun.

You're just assuming that arming a teacher is going to give them the ability, nerve and stones to actually do something with the gun. This is just a bad assumption. Shooting is an acquired skill like anything else. You don't practice - you're more likely to be spraying your bullets pseudo-randonly anyways. Could it have prevented the death we've seen at these school shootings - yes. Would it have - who knows?

Besides, putting a handgun (since they won't be able to conceal much more) up against an automatic or semi-automatic machine gun is a losing battle the vast majority of the time.

You do realize there is training involved when getting a CCL, and I'd say the vast majority take up great responsibility when planning to carry a firearm, like hitting up the range to work on skill from time to time. Most people realize carrying a firearm is worthless if you can't shoot for shit.

And the idea of a concealed carry is to get the edge on a criminal by surprise. You don't whip out the pistol when some maniac is toting a rifle or some type of automatic firearm, and flash it so they can see it from 50 feet away. If you are going to use it, you are a little more less obvious about it, and try to get the surprise shot.



On the note of preventative measures, that's what is wrong with this world. Everyone gets up in arms about doing something preventative, regardless of what the issue is... but they cry for sometime to be done after sometime happened... something that could have be prevented with the right steps taken prior.
The worlds in a very funny state right now. We are too hung up on morality, too hung up on being unoffensive. And in the end, it makes shit worse.
Hundreds of generations before us didn't worry about offending someone, and shit got done.
 

Garet Jax

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2000
6,369
0
71
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: Garet Jax
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: grrl
This is seriously messed up.

It's seriously messed up that Teachers haven't been armed all along.

So many deaths would've been prevented over the last decade or so from Columbine to Virginia Tech and everything in between.

It only takes one bullet to take out a shooter but if no one is armed against that shooter he or she can take out as many as they have bullets.

Amazing that so many don't get that until they are staring down the end of a gun barrel and then wished they had a gun.

You're just assuming that arming a teacher is going to give them the ability, nerve and stones to actually do something with the gun. This is just a bad assumption. Shooting is an acquired skill like anything else. You don't practice - you're more likely to be spraying your bullets pseudo-randonly anyways. Could it have prevented the death we've seen at these school shootings - yes. Would it have - who knows?

Besides, putting a handgun (since they won't be able to conceal much more) up against an automatic or semi-automatic machine gun is a losing battle the vast majority of the time.

You do realize there is training involved when getting a CCL, and I'd say the vast majority take up great responsibility when planning to carry a firearm, like hitting up the range to work on skill from time to time. Most people realize carrying a gun is worthless if you can't shoot for shit.

And the idea of a concealed carry is to get the edge on a criminal by surprise. You don't whip out the pistol when some maniac is toting a rifle or some type of automatic firearm, and flash it so they can see it from 50 feet away.



On the note of preventative measures, that's what is wrong with this world. Everyone gets up in arms about doing something preventative, regardless of what the issue is... but they cry for sometime to be done after sometime happened... something that could have be prevented with the right steps taken prior.
The worlds in a very funny state right now. We are too hung up on morality, too hung up on being unoffensive. And in the end, it makes shit worse.
Hundreds of generations before us didn't worry about offending someone, and shit got done.

You misunderstood my criticisms. I like people looking to the future, but I don't see this as preventing anything. Generally people who shoot up schools have chosen that particular school for a personal reason. A few teachers (or every teacher for that matter) carrying a gun isn't going to prevent them and isn't going to outright stop them from attempting the shooting.

The question is whether or not the teachers carrying guns will be able to stop the shooter before they would have normally been stopped without killing additional people. I just don't know the answer to this question.
 
Nov 7, 2000
16,403
3
81
if a teacher wants to shoot their students, being ALLOWED to carry a gun into the school is not going to make a difference
 

BigJ

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
21,330
1
81
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: classy
Something is wrong with allowing teachers to bring guns to school. We have teachers having sex with students through coersion now, next it will be through the threat of a gun. Put in metal detectors, but for god sakes not allow teachers to use guns. I wouldn't allow my child to go to school there. Teachers should be setting an example. If its too dangerous for you to teach without a gun, find another line of work. I don't believe the safety of my child is improved by anyone carrying a gun in school, unless they are police officers.

I don't always agree with classy, but I agree 100% with this. My fiance is a school teacher. If she was to the point where she felt threatened in her line of work, I sure as hell wouldn't want her working there. If you have to bring a gun to your place of work -- a school no less -- to feel safe or gun down a student who may be packing, find another line of work. I swear, this country is going to shit -- we need guns to solve every problem.

And I LOVE to listen to idiots that think that a licensed gun owner is the ANSWER to EVERY school shooting, workplace shooting, bus stabbing, etc.

"If so-in-so had a gun there, they would have been able to diffuse the situation at hand with no problems."

BULLSHIT! I haven't heard one of you fools give a real-life personal account of something like that actually going down [in a place that otherwise would be considered a crime-free environment].

Fundamentally, your thoughts on why people carry concealed weapons is flawed. The vast majority of people who legally carry will never, ever have a need to take their weapon out of the holster during a hostile situation, let alone fire it. Very few people carry because they feel threatened. Many people carry because they'd rather have an option if the shit hit the fan, rather than be defenseless. It's better to be prepared and not need it than need it and not be prepared. On top of this, many people who do carry, even when put into life threatening situations, would advise against using their weapons in situations where they'd be legally justified in using them. Part of carrying concealed is learning when and when not to attempt to use deadly force.

I can pretty much guarantee you that no teacher felt threatened or in any danger before Columbine or any number of school shootings happened. But the shootings still happened at these places. If someone had been carrying, there's a possibility something could have been done to minimize, not prevent casualties.

It's not the answer to the problem, I agree with that. I do believe that this is a step in the right direction.
 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
People's assessment of actual risk in life is pretty crappy. That town can probably save more lives if it focused on dietary education, exercise programs, even fencing off pools would save more lives than giving teachers guns.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: ZeroIQ
Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: CPA
Good! So OP, I'm wondering what your brilliant plan would be for the school to protect itself.

I realize wishing the problem didn't exist means nothing, but I don't see arming teachers as the solution. If weapons are a problem I'd suggest security guards and metal detectors as a start. The whole situation is just quite fucked up IMO.

You're right, school shootings never happen at schools with security guards and metal detectors and airplanes never get hi-jacked... oh wait... :confused:

Nothing is foolproof, obviously, but are you suggesting arming teachers will somehow prove a superior method? I don't see that as a logical assumption.

It's incredibly logical.

They're not saying they necessarily want to arm teachers. However, if a teacher has a permit to carry concealed, and has practiced and trained with that weapon, why prevent them from carrying in the classroom? If you stop and think about it for a moment - a teacher was at least smart enough to go through college and get a bachelor's and master's degree. And, you think it's better to put the weapon in the hands of a can't-get-a-better-job-than-security-guard? :confused:

Furthermore, if a student was hell-bent on getting into a school and shooting up the place, it simply means that they first shoot the security guards who are in the open. If you think about the incident at Virginia Tech, if the professors were carrying, how many classrooms do you think the shooter could have barged his way into? One professor put his life on the line to barricade the doorway with his body - had he a gun, he'd be alive as would many other students who died that day.

Also, concerning someone else's assertion that handguns are inferior to shotguns/rifles - not in close quarters (indoors.)

 

BigJ

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
21,330
1
81
Originally posted by: Mo0o
People's assessment of actual risk in life is pretty crappy. That town can probably save more lives if it focused on dietary education, exercise programs, even fencing off pools would save more lives than giving teachers guns.

Who said anything about giving teachers guns?

Why are people maniupulating this as if the school district is forcing teachers to carry firearms?

All they're doing is allowing teachers the option to carry if they meet the required guidelines on their own time.
 

jlee

Lifer
Sep 12, 2001
48,517
223
106
Originally posted by: Garet Jax
This is one area where you and I differ - this will not solve the problem. Will it make it better - who knows? If someone wants to shoot up the school - armed teachers aren't going to stop them - they probably aren't going to even deter them. If anything, the shooters are going to prepare themselves better.

Most of the school shootings are for personal reasons - the shooters feel some emotional attachment to that particular school.

Oh really?

Originally posted by: Garet Jax
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: grrl
This is seriously messed up.

It's seriously messed up that Teachers haven't been armed all along.

So many deaths would've been prevented over the last decade or so from Columbine to Virginia Tech and everything in between.

It only takes one bullet to take out a shooter but if no one is armed against that shooter he or she can take out as many as they have bullets.

Amazing that so many don't get that until they are staring down the end of a gun barrel and then wished they had a gun.

You're just assuming that arming a teacher is going to give them the ability, nerve and stones to actually do something with the gun. This is just a bad assumption. Shooting is an acquired skill like anything else. You don't practice - you're more likely to be spraying your bullets pseudo-randonly anyways. Could it have prevented the death we've seen at these school shootings - yes. Would it have - who knows?

Besides, putting a handgun (since they won't be able to conceal much more) up against an automatic or semi-automatic machine gun is a losing battle the vast majority of the time.

Your ignorance is astonishing.

Regardless, why do you have the impression that the school is going to be "arming teachers"..? They're allowing those WHO HAVE CARRY PERMITS to carry- with additional training, even. It's not like 'welcome to school, here's your gun' as you seem to be implying.
 

jamesbond007

Diamond Member
Dec 21, 2000
5,280
0
71
Originally posted by: JLee
People also need to keep in mind that not every teacher would be carrying..

C'mon, this is TEXAS we're talking about! :)


Originally posted by: JLee
Sooo why do police departments train with guns rather than martial arts? :p
Not knocking martial arts, but they're far from a panacea.

From what I've seen and read, many cops don't even pull their gun out in the line of duty. Those who do typically use it for the fear factor and only a select few actually kill someone with it.

Originally posted by: Pale Rider
So what's keeping the teacher from throwing a text book, a desk, a chair or anything else in th classroom at the student? Most teachers could easily overpower and strangle a student, or if they were very young simply stomp them to death. Your argument is not based on logic but on a illogical and unfounded fear of fire arms.

What's keeping the hunter from throwing sticks and stones at deer like indians used to do? It's the practicality and convenience of a firearm that make a hunter choose a gun. OK, that's pretty much apples and oranges, but there's definitely nothing that'd stop a teacher from throwing a chair or a book at a student. Point made. I would like to believe a bullet would be far more lethal, however, than a book or chair. If not, then count me stupid because I've totally been using the wrong ammunition when I go hunting! :p

Perhaps I'm interpreting incorrectly, but are you thinking I'm afraid of guns? Just in case you are, I own several and I hunt regularly. My favorite is my DPMS AR-15, by far. If you're not, that's fine and I just wanted to make that clear.

Originally posted by: pontifex
right, because karate chops can stop bullets :roll:

You may want to re-read my post. I didn't say they could, but martial arts, if used properly, could stop an idiot with a gun at close (very close) range.
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,804
46
91
Originally posted by: jamesbond007
Originally posted by: JLee
People also need to keep in mind that not every teacher would be carrying..

C'mon, this is TEXAS we're talking about! :)


Originally posted by: JLee
Sooo why do police departments train with guns rather than martial arts? :p
Not knocking martial arts, but they're far from a panacea.

From what I've seen and read, many cops don't even pull their gun out in the line of duty. Those who do typically use it for the fear factor and only a select few actually kill someone with it.

Originally posted by: Pale Rider
So what's keeping the teacher from throwing a text book, a desk, a chair or anything else in th classroom at the student? Most teachers could easily overpower and strangle a student, or if they were very young simply stomp them to death. Your argument is not based on logic but on a illogical and unfounded fear of fire arms.

What's keeping the hunter from throwing sticks and stones at deer like indians used to do? It's the practicality and convenience of a firearm that make a hunter choose a gun. OK, that's pretty much apples and oranges, but there's definitely nothing that'd stop a teacher from throwing a chair or a book at a student. Point made. I would like to believe a bullet would be far more lethal, however, than a book or chair. If not, then count me stupid because I've totally been using the wrong ammunition when I go hunting! :p

Perhaps I'm interpreting incorrectly, but are you thinking I'm afraid of guns? Just in case you are, I own several and I hunt regularly. My favorite is my DPMS AR-15, by far. If you're not, that's fine and I just wanted to make that clear.

Originally posted by: pontifex
right, because karate chops can stop bullets :roll:

You may want to re-read my post. I didn't say they could, but martial arts, if used properly, could stop an idiot with a gun at close (very close) range.

you watch too many movies
 

jlee

Lifer
Sep 12, 2001
48,517
223
106
Originally posted by: jamesbond007
Originally posted by: JLee
Sooo why do police departments train with guns rather than martial arts? :p
Not knocking martial arts, but they're far from a panacea.

From what I've seen and read, many cops don't even pull their gun out in the line of duty. Those who do typically use it for the fear factor and only a select few actually kill someone with it.[/b]
Wrong.
 

grrl

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2001
6,204
1
0
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: CPA
Good! So OP, I'm wondering what your brilliant plan would be for the school to protect itself.

I realize wishing the problem didn't exist means nothing, but I don't see arming teachers as the solution. If weapons are a problem I'd suggest security guards and metal detectors as a start. The whole situation is just quite fucked up IMO.

And how are metal detectors and security guards going to give the impression that the school is for learning, not a juvenile detention facility.

And allowing concealed weapons does otherwise? :confused:
 

grrl

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2001
6,204
1
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: grrl
This is seriously messed up.

It's seriously messed up that Teachers haven't been armed all along.

So many deaths would've been prevented over the last decade or so from Columbine to Virginia Tech and everything in between.

It only takes one bullet to take out a shooter but if no one is armed against that shooter he or she can take out as many as they have bullets.

Amazing that so many don't get that until they are staring down the end of a gun barrel and then wished they had a gun.

Have you ever been in that position? I find it hard to believe a teacher, even if trained in handgun use, would have the state of mind to so simply end a situation like Columbine or Virginia Tech.
 

jlee

Lifer
Sep 12, 2001
48,517
223
106
Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: grrl
This is seriously messed up.

It's seriously messed up that Teachers haven't been armed all along.

So many deaths would've been prevented over the last decade or so from Columbine to Virginia Tech and everything in between.

It only takes one bullet to take out a shooter but if no one is armed against that shooter he or she can take out as many as they have bullets.

Amazing that so many don't get that until they are staring down the end of a gun barrel and then wished they had a gun.

Have you ever been in that position? I find it hard to believe a teacher, even if trained in handgun use, would have the state of mind to so simply end a situation like Columbine or Virginia Tech.

Oh really?

Students have jumped a gunman- getting shot in the process. You're saying a teacher, who already carries a concealed firearm when not at school, would not have the capability to address a threat?

Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: CPA
Good! So OP, I'm wondering what your brilliant plan would be for the school to protect itself.

I realize wishing the problem didn't exist means nothing, but I don't see arming teachers as the solution. If weapons are a problem I'd suggest security guards and metal detectors as a start. The whole situation is just quite fucked up IMO.

And how are metal detectors and security guards going to give the impression that the school is for learning, not a juvenile detention facility.

And allowing concealed weapons does otherwise? :confused:

Perhaps you should look up the definition of the word "concealed."
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: grrl
This is seriously messed up.

It's seriously messed up that Teachers haven't been armed all along.

So many deaths would've been prevented over the last decade or so from Columbine to Virginia Tech and everything in between.

It only takes one bullet to take out a shooter but if no one is armed against that shooter he or she can take out as many as they have bullets.

Amazing that so many don't get that until they are staring down the end of a gun barrel and then wished they had a gun.

Have you ever been in that position? I find it hard to believe a teacher, even if trained in handgun use, would have the state of mind to so simply end a situation like Columbine or Virginia Tech.

Look at the well publicized case of the professor Librescu who barricaded the door with his own body at Virginia Tech so that his students would have more time to escape. Do you really think that he wouldn't have drawn his weapon had he had one in order to protect his students? While I don't think a teacher would necessarily go hunting down the hallway for a shooter, I find it unreasonable to believe even for a moment that a teacher trained in handgun use would panic and not be able to protect his classroom from a shooter.
 

grrl

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2001
6,204
1
0
Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: grrl
This is seriously messed up.

It's seriously messed up that Teachers haven't been armed all along.

So many deaths would've been prevented over the last decade or so from Columbine to Virginia Tech and everything in between.

It only takes one bullet to take out a shooter but if no one is armed against that shooter he or she can take out as many as they have bullets.

Amazing that so many don't get that until they are staring down the end of a gun barrel and then wished they had a gun.

Have you ever been in that position? I find it hard to believe a teacher, even if trained in handgun use, would have the state of mind to so simply end a situation like Columbine or Virginia Tech.

Oh really?

That's one example, I asked earlier for links and this is all that's been provided so far. In that story, the teacher stopped the gunman outside in the parking lot, the teacher did not have to enter a room crowded with many students and two gunmen (i.e. Columbine).

Students have jumped a gunman- getting shot in the process. You're saying a teacher, who already carries a concealed firearm when not at school, would not have the capability to address a threat?

Links?

Yes, I'm saying license to carry a concealed weapon does not guarantee the ability to effectively employ the weapon.


Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: grrl
Originally posted by: CPA
Good! So OP, I'm wondering what your brilliant plan would be for the school to protect itself.

I realize wishing the problem didn't exist means nothing, but I don't see arming teachers as the solution. If weapons are a problem I'd suggest security guards and metal detectors as a start. The whole situation is just quite fucked up IMO.

And how are metal detectors and security guards going to give the impression that the school is for learning, not a juvenile detention facility.

And allowing concealed weapons does otherwise? :confused:

Perhaps you should look up the definition of the word "concealed."[/quote]

Your response is specious. People will know that some teachers have a concealed weapon, so how does that reality (and necessity) make it more like a school?


Originally posted by: DrPizza

Look at the well publicized case of the professor Librescu who barricaded the door with his own body at Virginia Tech so that his students would have more time to escape. Do you really think that he wouldn't have drawn his weapon had he had one in order to protect his students? While I don't think a teacher would necessarily go hunting down the hallway for a shooter, I find it unreasonable to believe even for a moment that a teacher trained in handgun use would panic and not be able to protect his classroom from a shooter.

You are assuming that Librescu would be armed, which would be a matter of choice for him. If he had had the option and declined, then nothing would have been different at Virginia Tech.

Why do you equate handgun training with training for a life/death situation? Does that really include the necessary elements of police training?