Armed security in schools, yes or no.

In that situation, it didn't. I think the question is whether it would better with more (ie;all teachers).

What's interesting to me is that people don't want guns but they want security and the ability to protect against something like Columbine or Newton from happening again but without turning schools into armed camps.

Which is to say I don't think people really know what they want yet. And that's OK. Better to have a meaningful discussion before going off half cocked (bad pun, I know). Despite what's happened, the whole issue is complex and there is no easy, one-size-fits-all answer either.

 

It's unfortunate that the MEDIA plays a HUGE part in fueling the anti-gun fire. And the politics behind the media.....whom harbor their own beliefs (usually anti)and cover the negativity just to get ratings. How often do you see a CCW GOOD story on the news?

Rarely

There's no way in hell to prevent these things from happening simply by changing some laws..... The people who have a criminal mindset will never be changed by these laws. They will always find what they want/need to get the job done or they will improvise and still be able to kill.

 

now we are going to have to post security at all fires to protect the firemen too?

 

exactly.

and the voucher would allow the child to go to the school of his/her choice. the quality teachers would of course gravitate there as well.

the crap schools and equal teachers would be out of business...or as I noted earlier, they'd catch the darwin disease.

another post that shows your lack of knowledge on the subject.

you don't think there's a two tiered system today? you don't think lower income kids are forced to go to crap schools? with crap teachers/admins? why not give them kids a choice to enroll in a better school? including a private (non government) school, should they choose?


the point is (as post #136 pointed out)...
the parents/students should be in controll of their education options...not the government.

it is so simple and fair it makes sense for the system to be in place nationally. the only thing stopping it are the politicians and teacher union. I guess their power is more important than the quality of education and choice for the kids.

 

How would one officer in an entire complex be effective? every student knows where they are and when. I would think that to be a very easy thing to get around and there for don't see it as being effective at all.
We have to address the culture of guns AND the mental health issues out there
Someone said, "addressing gun violence without addressing guns is like addressing lung cancer without addressing cigarettes"

 

no

outlaw assault matches

 

I just read that two firemen were shot and killed at a fire in NY.

 

The point of officers is because they can patrol areas, not stand in one area... Other wise you might as well just install gun turrets. What most people aren't realizing is there are already checks to buy guns. Short of monthly psychiatric checks of everyone in the country who owns a gun, and random door to door searches to make sure nobody owns a gun who shouldnt be able to. Are you willing to allow the cops to come into your house when ever they please to make sure you don't?

Here is something else to think about I came accross earlier. Why do secret service agents need to carry weapons? Just make anywhere the president is a gun free zone that should do it.

 

If we add police it "might" help, however if this (armed security) was implemented who do you think is getting the first bullet?

Unfortunately IMO there isnt anything one can do to prevent stuff like this, we can put 20 police in schools and they find another way, next would be a bomb or something like that, there is ALWAYS a way around protections if one really wants to do a bad thing.

We just need people to give a shit, and for this country not to be so cold to its people in about every way shape and form.

Its society thats broken and actions like the one this is based on will continue to happen once a person feels completely hopeless. Things like this were unheard of (or at least much much rarer) back in the 40s, the reason I say the 40's is because my grandparents IMO were the last generation of people that had any real values, after their generation, morals and values became nothing but words, not reality.

It is now the "ME" generation. Meaning nobody really cares about their neighbor, and only about themselves, where one is wiling to better themselves at the expense of another..

 

A rent-a-cop with a pistol against a bullet proof vest crazy with a automatic assault weapon... oh, this should end well.

 

I work as a Security and Personal Protection Area Supervisor. Our company takes pride knowing that we are well trained at what we do, and not Allied Barton or G4S by any means. While I think there's money to be made off of this for our company, I don't think it's going to prevent anything. You would need a team to properly respond to any actual threat. Even the police wait for a second car to arrive before going in guns blazing.

To give everyone an idea of what it would cost, armed guards (for my company) Start at $15/hour and get raises every 3 months, resulting in $1 per year. Even if we just covered expenses, the bill rate to the school board would be in the range of $21.50/hour. For two guys, that's $43/hour. Kids are on school grounds from 6am to 10pm, depending on clubs, practices, whatever. Some schools are more, some are less, but I'll use that as a average. That's 14 hours minimum. Ideally, that's two shifts. Given that these guys need a 40hr week, you would need two 8hr shifts. This would work out well, giving double coverage for two hours, say during lunch when all the kids are out of classrooms. So say 16 hours a day billed at $43/hour is $688 per day in security alone. School is in session 5 days a week, and many schools also have Saturday School Detention and others on campus (lunch personnel, repairs to the school, janitors, sometimes teachers and students for clubs or whatever). $688 per day for 6 days a week is $4,128 a week. Regular schools are in session 36 weeks a year (minimum of 180 full days of school).

This comes out to a contract of $148,608 per school. Who k kws the accuracy of this information, but a quick google search reveals this...

Florida Public Schools: 3,629
Number of Students: 2,587,554
Florida Elementary Schools: 1,862
Florida Middle Schools: 517
Florida High Schools: 448

Using this number of schools, you come up with a budget of $539,298,432 in security ALONE. That's not going to include time for proper training, sick time, vacation time, overtime for special events (prom, homecoming, etc for high/middle schools), medical benefits, etc...

Add all that, and you're looking at a $750,000,000 or three quarter of a billion dollar contract for SECURITY. Want actual Law Enforcement? Look out...closer to $2 or 3 BILLION!!!

Tragedy it may be, it's not going to stop crazy people from doing anything. Taking everyone's rights away and increasing taxes for other people to carry the guns is going to get old really quick. While I would take advantage of people's fears and accept a billion dollar contract, I doubt it would do much in the long run. Teachers should be allowed to protect themselves and carry a CCW, IF THEY WANT TO however. That would be a free option. Just saying.

 

I think OZ-T gets it and dare I say, you may have misunderstood what he wrote.

 

Oh right, cause all shootings are done with fully automatic weapons
You can have campuses have better security(Fenced in, controlled entrances, etc)but it still wont stop students from bringing guns in.
If someone wants to break in a campus/mall/church/etc, they will do it.
My highschool had a cop on duty and she carried a gun. Didnt make me feel much safer.
I doubt Obama cares about this crap. Hes just doing everything for the media and satisfying all the people that are scared.
And btw, you realize veterans(specially ones that deployed) can develop PTSD and its not always treated right or caught until they break....
end rant lol

 

doubtful

he posted this earlier inthe thread:

it (among other posts)...shows lack of knowledge on the subject. It's not like vouchers are extra funds...they represent exesting funds.

and here:

as if rich kids will get more vouchers?

again...lack of understanding on the subject.

and, as I posted...it's not the rich kids that need the choices, they already have parents with resources to make education choices. it's the middle and lower income families who don't have the resources to make the choice.

School Vouchers = Education Choice for ALL!!!

 

I don't know.

But to me, allowing a teacher with a ccw in a classroom means more than having taken a class and qualifying at the range once and a while. That person would now be responsible for any number of kids plus making tactical decisions about whether to shoot or not and that requires some time and a lot of effort to make good decisions. It also means in addition to staying current with teaching skills, that person now needs to commit to 'tactical training' to keep their CCW skills sharp.

I don't know that it's as easy as saying 'if you have a ccw, you can now carry on the school grounds". And I don't know if bringing more guns into a school setting is the right thing to do either.

 

I think it is a terrible idea Ian, I don't think any teachers going into the profession would be comfortable with having to carry a weapon. Too many things that could go wrong. Accidental discharge, getting into a physical altercation with a student and getting disarmed by that student. Not to mention guidlines for how and when to fire, it's a liability nightmare. I would imagine, for every nut who thinks arming a teacher is a good idea there would be a 100 parents that would think it was insane. If it was my son's school that would try this i would sue the district to stop it.

 

x1000

 

If armed guards are not the answer for an immediate solution, what is? All I have heard from anti-gun people is what shouldn't be the solution but not one of them gives a better solution for the immediate need. I would rather see a gun on a guard in a school than to see a gun in a school used to massacre defenseless faculty and children.

Another law has no affect to those that disobey laws. Harsher penalties don't have an effect on someone that intends to die in the process of murdering others. A gun grab would only be effective to law abiding citizens and would take decades to only get maybe 50% of the guns. Criminals wouldn't turn their guns in. All a low capacity magazine does over a high capacity one is stop the shooting for 2-5 seconds. Doing "something" doesn't mean doing anything effective.

The fact is that there are millions of guns and billions of rounds of ammo in society. You can talk all day on the woulda, shoulda, coulda senarios but they are there now. The only logical way to effectively fight again those that use guns for crimes is to have EVERYONE have a gun to defensively even the playing field. If you don't want to do that please don't stop the rest of us from protecting ourselves.

 

They are gonna ban all guns ?