Texas Lieutenant Governor Calls For ‘Hardening’ Of Schools
SANTA FE, Texas (AP) — Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick called Sunday for a “hardening” of the nation’s school buildings in the wake of the attack by a 17-year-old student who killed 10 people at a high school near Houston.
Patrick, a Republican, blamed a “culture of violence” and said more needs to be done to keep shooters away from students, such as restricting school entrances and arming teachers.
“When you’re facing someone who’s an active shooter, the best way to take that shooter down is with a gun. But even better than that is four to five guns to one,” he told CNN’s “State of the Union.”
[...]
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2018/05/20/texas-school-shooting-santa-fe-high/
I don't think the idea of arming teachers is a very viable solution.
First of all, being armed creates a feeling of apprehension and danger not conducive to teaching. It utterly changes the focus.
Here's a professor who is highly trained in firearms usage and has a conceal carry license explaining how it feels and why he thinks it would be a terrible idea:
"Being armed places you in a state of mind that is not conducive to teaching. Carrying a firearm responsibly means that you are operating in a state of heightened awareness and caution. You are aware of where your firearm is at all times. You are aware of your environment. You are aware of everyone around you. And whether you want to admit it or not, you are looking for threat—trying to identify whether or not you might need to use that firearm you are carrying.
Such mindsets might be totally appropriate for a law enforcement officer, a security officer, or a soldier. They are not at all appropriate for educating.
Personally, I cannot imagine walking into class every day being mentally prepared to both educate hungry minds and execute another human being if the situation required it.
When educators become enforcers, education stops."
Much more of his experiences and reasoning as well as a general discussion of arming teachers- how it would work, and obstacles to it.
I urge anyone who wants to honestly research the issue and intellectually debate the pros and cons, to read it.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.citylab.com/amp/article/554129/
Second, some teachers experience their own mental health or other stability issues - molesting students, feeding them semen, humiliating or abusing students, having psychotic episodes, having rage issues. Etc. I think more armed teachers increases the chance that a nut could be carrying. (But read below about how Texas already deals with this issue).
Third, from my own observations, only highly trained individuals who consistently retrain on a regular basis and are in a state of alert at all times would be able to effectively neutralize an active shooter. Some may be able to respond if they weren't in the direct line of fire and had time to gather themselves and get ready to use their firearm. Like maybe a teacher like the one in this tragedy who stood next to the door. If he had a gun he could also have it cocked and ready to shoot as the intruder entered. But for teachers already in the class when the shooter barges in, even those who are highly trained would lack the response time usually.
But either way, many armed teachers would simply panic or accidentally hit an innocent person because they can't aim well, in such a panicked situation where there are moving targets, or purposefully hit an innocent person thinking they are the bad guy.
So, for example, armed teacher standing next to the door waiting for the bad guy to enter? A kid running into the classroom trying to get away from the gunman could be easily executed by the teacher. By mistake.
Fourth, basic firearm safety. There are way too many accidents some fatal, or suicides or homicides, related to responsible gun owners. Most people are responsible gun owners. Until they're not.
It is human nature to make mistakes. The most highly trained gun users make mistakes. But with a deadly weapon, mistakes can be, well, deadly.
Check out this highly trained law enforcement officer shooting himself in a a room full of kids during a lecture on gun safety.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WzHEOSyMqug
It's just too easy to forget where you placed it. Not know it's loaded. Leave the safety off. Leave it where a student can access it. I mean there's a lot going on in a classroom. It's busy and distracting and intense. But we expect them to be safe armed guards at the same time?
And what about some psycho kid overpowering the teacher and taking their weapon? Kid is standing next to teacher and suddenly flips?
Fifth, the expense would be too great. Texas already arms teachers. Many districts have plans that allow for the arming of staff under controlled circumstances that include 80 hours of training and mental health testing. (I think the mental health testing would be key but not foolproof but the training wouldn't be near enough to adequately prepare them to safely and quickly and effectively respond, or to avoid accidents, IMO).
But the cost of such programs is prohibitive. Please read this article which discusses the programs Texas districts have and how they work. To engage in an honest discussion, it is necessary to fully consider both sides and the Texas programs admittedly seem well thought out and to address the main concerns to arming teachers, (although it doesn't address the effect on the teachers and their ability to tech while fully armed).
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.caller.com/amp/364677002
Sixth. Most teachers oppose the idea. I don't think there re enough responsible, stable teachers who want to be armed to make this a viable preventive option.
"Nearly 75% of teachers oppose the idea of being trained to carry guns in schools, a new survey finds. According to an online Gallup surveyreleased Friday, 63% surveyed strongly opposed the idea of arming teachers, with 10% somewhat opposing the measure. Only 11% strongly favored the idea, and 7% were neutral. Yet just 18% of the teachers surveyed said they would go through training to carry a gun if their district or administrators provided it.
Meanwhile, six in 10 teachers think schools would become less safe if educators armed themselves, though seven in 10 think it would in effective in stopping the next mass shooting."
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/5203935/arming-teachers-gun-control-poll
So what to do? There are other options and better uses of resources that would be funneled toward arming teachers, IMO. Here is a comprehensive look at how some European nations are handling the problem using an approach that tries to prevent the massacres before they ever come close to fruition rather than reacting when it happens:
"In a first step, European nations drafted schemes to identify at-risk individuals. Swiss authorities, for instance, have a list of about 2,000 individuals they suspect of being willing to commit shootings. All of them are frequently approached by authorities, along with psychologists.
Other countries, including Germany, have attempted to set up government-led national networks dedicated to spot potential attackers and to stop them before they can pursue their plans.
Funding for in-school psychologists was increased exponentially. Teachers at every school are now being trained to act as “trusted personnel,” as a first point of contact either for students who want to seek psychological support themselves or for others who want to raise alarm over the behavior of an individual. Psychologists are then called in to examine each case further.
In a second step, at-risk individuals are barred from accessing firearms. In Switzerland, they are forced to hand over their weapons immediately or are barred from purchasing new ones. Psychological tests are now also standard practice for Germans younger than 25 who want to purchase firearms."
https://www.seattletimes.com/nation...e-armed-other-countries-have-different-ideas/
Much more at link. Please read it.
