That's strange, IG is pretty much open source for a page like his. Non IG friends always seem to see the links I send them.Originally Posted by Malamute
That's strange, IG is pretty much open source for a page like his. Non IG friends always seem to see the links I send them.
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
Oh I bet he's still pissed off today. But if he waited long enough to start with that train wreck interview of the DPS LT he waited long enough to have figured out the essentials. Not much since then to contradict him.
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
Accepting the fact that these A-holes are *clearly* not in a rational state of mind when they undertake these shootings, nonetheless - they (especially *school* shooters) tend to be inadequate personalities who are looking to commit mayhem with no resistance (which is why they are showing up at Elementary schools to start with). They are not looking for a fight. Their knowing that there are/may be armed good guys on site may very likely be enough to persuade them to remain in mom's basement and just keep fantasizing about doing all the things instead of actually doing them. Too, even if they show up, they tend to wilt/lose/suicide at the first sign of real resistance. Armed teachers are worth a shot. If nothing else, it gives them a fighting chance.
No, it's not perfect, but as you indicated, it is another layer.
Last edited by Tensaw; 06-01-2022 at 08:01 AM.
All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
No one is coming. It is up to us.
The concept of taking a bullet for a kid doesn't terrify. We are in education because we love kids. Not being able to fight back effectively pisses me off.
Teachers and staff members in a room with a bunch of kids have physically shielded the kids with their bodies, dying to protect them. Wouldn't they be better off with a .38 or .380 or 9mm in their pocket? It doesn't solve everything, but at least it gives them options. Having it doesn't mean they will automatically win: it just means they actually get to play. They are going to be there, anyway, unless they've gotten so tired of the other crap they have to put up with in education that they've left the profession.
Without it, their options are basically run, or die. Die heroically shielding a kid's body with their own, or heroically trying to tackle a person with a gun while "armed" with a pair of scissors or improvised impact device, but likely still die.
I think that Paul made some great points.
#RESIST
First, I 100% agree with you that it’s worth allowing teachers to be armed because it gives them a fighting chance. However, i think the deterrent value is generally bullshit. Just look at how many active shooter incidents seem to happen at courthouses. The perpetrator can’t not know he’s going to encounter armed resistance at a place that’s full of law enforcement officers. The active shooters seem to fall into into two camps based on their desired end-state.
One group plans to live at the end so they surrender when confronted. These guys actually might be deterred if they know school staff are armed since they just want to rack up a kill count and live to hear people talk about it.
The second group goes in knowing they aren’t coming out alive. Some of those guys will kill themselves rather than be taken alive but others will fight it out until the end. They aren’t afraid of dying because their death is part of the end-state they envisioned from the start. The guys who don’t plan on being taken alive probably don’t care much if some school staff might be armed. This guy didn’t kill himself or give up when he saw armed resistance. He engaged in a gunfight with the first three officers who showed up and then engaged in a gunfight with the officers who actually breached the classroom he was in until they killed him. I haven’t seen the photos of the shield the pointman was carrying but I remember someone mentioning it had numerous bullet impacts to its face.
To me, the point of allowing some school staff to be armed isn’t to deter violence. It’s so that if violence happens to be the order of the day, someone at the school can fight back, stop the killing, and save some children who can’t otherwise protect themselves.
My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.
I agree with many points about. Insurance can be handled by legislation limiting liability. Deterrence isn't a factor for many shooters giving the suicidal and 'show biz media' nature of their actions. Fighting back is. That many teachers won't participate is irrelevant to allowing those that want to, have that ability.
Will the teacher take the first round, perhaps? But will the teacher in the second classroom? Look at the VT Holocaust elderly survivor who held the door closed, taking rounds and dying. Perhaps he could have had a better option. The teacher at Sandy Hook who guided her class into the restroom. Could she deal with someone coming through the door?
Are teachers competent - well, in my old place of work - one fellow was a well decorated colonel in Viet Nam, who was embedded with the Montagnards. Champion level judo player. One was a for real SEAL. Another had done the well known trainers we know as did I. Other veterans, some other firearms enthusiasts who level of training I was unaware of. The campus law ran their own active shooter drills quite a bit. They had some EBRs - OMG and were serious about it.
Of course, as I said - a clever killer can make the first, well chosen, high density classroom a death trap. Might someone be able to draw against that person when they come in the door - I think that is possible. At least, give folks a chance.
How a teacher should carry is a debate for a different day. Will the armed teacher become obvious and avoided, perhaps but their room will be safer.
All the objections are the same ones made to concealed carry in general. So these initial cops screwed up. Well, how about the TX officers who stopped the terrorist attach on a meeting related to Islam and free speech - https://www.cnn.com/2015/05/04/us/ga...ing/index.html - Garland, TX.
The good guy with a gun - was such a poor choice of phrase. Having it spouted by sleaze bag Ted Cruz doesn't help I grant you. The case can be made better.
Known armed resistance or the possibility of it might deter the partially crazy types. The totally crazy are going to go anyway hoping to due in the blaze of glory they seek. IMO, those types don’t give a rats ass if they shoot it out with teachers, admin, CCW or LEO.
Realistically you’re going to get maybe 1 or 2 teachers per campus that are both willing and capable. That’s being optimistic. In seeing the staff at my wife’s school it’s maybe 1. Elementary schools are filled with a different type of person. Better than nothing. Absolutely! Realistically an effective response or preventative measure. No.
Best to prevent the crazies from getting in. Strong doors that lock and are routinely maintained. Alarms to notify staff of door openings. Cameras to ID people breaking security protocols and discipline for those caught. Including the kids who do it.
All that takes money. Money the districts won’t have to build billion dollar athletic facilities. Money they won’t have to spend on yet another version if a broken standardized test that is then un-standardized for socioeconomic status.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I just got in here and Im not going to read thru 60pages. If this was suggested, I apologize. What about having retired LEO or Vets as guards if they're looking for a retirement gig?
Also, as guns are the main focus here, I think what we need to discuss to peoples mental health. We need to figure out what makes people think (and act) like this
In Oregon, the elementary schools, high schools, and middle schools (when we lived there) were short on standard brick and mortar structures. The existing ones were surrounded by quite a few temporary (but there for years) Butler type buildings. In TX, the community colleges had quite a few. No way to secure those. At dismissal times, hundreds of kids are piling into numerous buses at the high school - need a brigade to secure that.
Thus, these are very vulnerable. A rebuilding of our 130,000 schools into mini-Maginot fortresses would be an incredible enterprise. Of course, better locking protocols make absolute sense.
1 or 2 capable people, perhaps. How many capable people are there in the average supermarket or movie theater? Giffords organization says that about 3 million folks carry every day. Certainly, the training/competition world hasn't seen 3 million participants.
We need the structural solutions to buildings and better evaluation of threats. However, making the classrooms part of the general concealed carry paradigm should not be argued against.
There are successes - and I'm surprised that rather than political rants - the NRA didn't give a scholarly presentation of the success stories in moderate but clear terms. Dr. Lee Silverman or the TX churces, for example - and others. Get Ted and Trump off the stage and do a better center piece presentation.
I think trying to identify the shooters is more cost effective. Trivial mental health evaluation must go. Changing the snitch culture that ignores threats must be changed.
Reply With Quote