Armed security in schools, yes or no.

More guns = not the answer. God bless Ammerika

 

A factoid is something that is not reliable and if true not significant. I don't think it applies to Officer Gardner at Columbine. His presense and action in confronting the murderers undoubtedly save lives. The left always argues against legal or law enforcement action on the basis of its predicted imperfect results. The symbolic "gun free zone" at the school was not only imperfect, but assiniine. Still liberals loved it. Another gun restriction would be just the same....but when we get it the Huffington Post will not editorialism about its fallibility...It will be "a much needed step". Is anybody else onto these bastards?

 

sorry, not a left/right thing.

 

No company ever would underwrite liability insurance for armed teachers, it's a moot point.

 

"not a left/right thing". This is a serious reality disconnect. The story that you put on the thread was broken by the Huffington Post, a left publication with an anti-gun agenda. Anybody notice how the left is always at pains to obsfucate the reality of the left/right struggle? The reality is that EVERY values issue, which is to say, every issue that is not immediately resolvable factually, results in a left/right worldview divide. You are on the left. Own it. We on the right read the huffington post for laughs, but never quote it.

Finally, the prime characteristic of a leftist is that they don't answer arguments. They issue fiats.... Like "sorry, its not a left/right thing". The implication of your post was totally refuted, and this is all you got?

 

Welcome to the world of Self Defense and CCL.

If teachers were ever allowed to carry in schools, they would need lots of training, pass strict testing, and abide by very strict rules on how to deal with certain situations. Ultimately, a gun should never ever be drawn unless death could occur.

Nobody should ever be expected to CCL unless they are willing to carry the extra responsibility.

 

maybe it was just the way i was raised.

 

this. The entire idea behind carrying is being trained enough to understand when to draw and when to try to pacify the situation.

 

if you talk politics, we can stop now.
IBTL

 

this was offered as fact ( but I did not hear him say it personally, so I cannot verify it) showing that armed security is fallible and not the obvious answer some think., period. Not a Left or Right thing, more of a truth thing.
I still think it's a bad idea.

 

The government employs armed security to stop shootings. Last time i checked a public school is part of the goverment. And there are gov facilities that have childcare centers that have armed security.

 

My school has had this for a few years now.

 

are you saying the issue is not political?

 

Absolutely 100% FOR IT...

 

True.

 

I would like to believe that there could be some good in armed security around schools but after putting my heart and soul into it I am just not seeing it. Let me explain you why.

Something people rarely talk about is concept of cowardly lion. Imagine yourself being 35 years old, 3 beautiful children aged 2,4 and 7. Your wife is a stay at home mom and you do a swell job looking over students until one day.... everything changes.

Let's say for sake of argument you are doing your rounds when a crazed gunman enters school armed from head to toe... what do you do? Go against that person or think about your own family? Does appeal of doing public good outweigh being a father and a husband? What should come first to you?

I think it is very easy to be all gun hoe about wanting to carry a gun, being the tough guy until bullets start wizzing over your head and you are outgunned.

So question is... do we need to superarm the guards? Do we need to beef up school security? Do we need to do absolutely nothing? What do we need to do?

On day of shooting yours truly was volunteering at local middle school grading science projects. As a matter of fact as shooting was taking place I was surrounded by about 200 school children during their homeroom session. No announcements, nothing... heck I did not know about the shooting until I checked my phone hours later. But what I did notice is that I entered reception area, scanned my driver's license and entered school without going through metal detectors or being screened in any way...

I can not fathom how having armed guards in a school of 1600 students can be any good. Armed guard can not be in 20 places at once and even if he runs to the gun closet to pick up extra guns and ammo... it would still take like 10 minutes to get to the crime site with bullets flying in all directions.

And have you ever seen your average security guard? Aged 45-60 overweight and or out of shape and your average cop is not really cream de la creme either. Not all but quite a few I've seen. And let's not forget that its completely different to fire at a stationary target and at a guy yielding ar-15 vs your glock.

I am by no means anti gun but I honestly do not see how we could implement armed security and guarantee results. Guns do not deter people with mischief on their mind... its like locking your doors... you lock doors against honest people. If someone wants to break in they will break in. And that is exactly why it easier said than done when it comes to guns and security. I am a firm believer that culture of violence is promoted through easy access to medium. If you think about it... as this gunman shot a bunch of kids, there was another person in china knifing 20 some children who have survived to tell the tale. Similar situation... completely different outcome.

Now how can we solve this? I sure hope someone has a better answer than just adding more guns to the mix. Heck... who would pay for armed guards and guns? Last time I checked people do not want their taxes raised and I do not see millions of volunteers with guns stepping up to do it for free.

 

One armed guard or one policeman with a duty weapon is out gunned by someone that plans a suicidal attack. I say train teachers that want to carry. Don't let anyone know who has weapons and who doesn't. Then see who gambles on which classroom to enter. These shooters are cowards!

 

1) there is no such thing as a "guarantee" in any of this, ...this is "life", ...it's risky and unpredictable by default...
2) an armed "responder" "on site", i.e. "in the building" will be able to respond a hell of a lot faster than the police/SWAT...
3) the lone sociopaths/wacko killers are planning to meet their maker from the get go,. ...either they kill a lot of people (due to the time delay of police/SWAT arrival on scene and entry), before killing themself, or they kill little to no people (due to on-site armed response). usually at first sight of armed resistance they "off themselves"...