Surely this is a bad idea

[MrJan]

BBC News - South Dakota to allow armed teachers in schools (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21722377)

There must even be the odd pro-gun person that thinks this is stupid.


*Sits back and awaits 4 pages of abuse which leads to the thread being locked.

[Starter]

A great idea. It'll be the end of all those snotty little kids causing problems in the back of the room.

Is that enough abuse to qualify? :p :D

[gloomyDAY]

Putting guns near the reach of curious kids? South Dakota is simply moronic.

[steveaki13]

Terrible idea. That is due to be the place for the next massacre then.

Why does it seem the basic idea here is, hey we have a guy problem and threat. Wait I know how to solve it. More Guns.


The best idea would be to tighten gun laws and ease out the gun culture. When will certain factions of the US realise this.

[Knock-on]

If you have a gun culture like America does, it sort of makes sense. Of course, the ideal scenario is no guns at all but that's not going to happen any time soon so better the (supposed) responsible adults have some form of defence if the worst should happen.

Still very sad.

[yodasarmpit]

Oh dear.

[race aficionado]

Bang!

[BDunnell]

Another way of normalising the presence of guns in one's vicinity and entrenching the feeling of a constant threat, and as such deeply counterproductive.

[Jag_Warrior]

I am a gun owner, but even to me this sounds like a very bad idea.

[Knock-on]

Why Jag?

Guns are an everyday part of American life. It's piss easy for a nutter to walk into a school and start spraying bullets isn't it. Why not give the teachers a chance of a good old fashioned shoot out instead of being slaughtered. That's their constitutional right after all.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people and Teachers, Teachers can kill people too. Sod the monkeys ;)

If you are going to have barbarism, you must at least try to protect the vulnerable and innocent until they can buy more guns and perpetuate the cycle?

[Jag_Warrior]

Well, since you put it that way... I've changed my mind! :D

[Knock-on]

Well, since you put it that way... I've changed my mind! :D

:D Seriously though, you have such a gun problem that any half wit with a desire for fame and infamy thinks blasting a school to bits is a good idea. By eliminating guns from schools, you just leave them open.

[BDunnell]

:D Seriously though, you have such a gun problem that any half wit with a desire for fame and infamy thinks blasting a school to bits is a good idea. By eliminating guns from schools, you just leave them open.

And allowing ever more guns into schools isn't equally as bad, if not worse? Certainly, it does nothing to work towards a long-term solution to gun violence in schools. It's a bit like seeking to tackle paedophilia by giving every school its own child sex offender.

[SGWilko]

And allowing ever more guns into schools isn't equally as bad, if not worse? Certainly, it does nothing to work towards a long-term solution to gun violence in schools. It's a bit like seeking to tackle paedophilia by giving every school its own child sex offender.

I see and agree with the point you make. The gun situation in America is like the oil magnate situation around the world - too much money at stake and too much to lose.

Look at the legal suits being filed by the oil co's on 'anti competition' towards Tesla operating an electric recharging network.

If politician's were uncorruptable, then there would be a very serious move to deal with the mess and stop using the 2nd amendment chestnut.

Money money money............

[Jag_Warrior]

:D Seriously though, you have such a gun problem that any half wit with a desire for fame and infamy thinks blasting a school to bits is a good idea. By eliminating guns from schools, you just leave them open.

Let me offer just one (of the many) reasons why I think this is a bad idea. Let's say you have an incident involving an intruder in a school with a gun. As I've read this law, it allows not just teachers and administrators to carry firearms, but also volunteers. Are all of the volunteers known to every other person in that school who is armed??? The intruder produces a firearm and begins threatening people in the school. Two volunteers are first on the scene and produce their firearms. A teacher shows up and sees three people displaying firearms. The teacher only knows one of the volunteers. The teacher trains her firearm on the most suspicious looking, scared looking unknown person... who happens to be one of the armed volunteers. The volunteer also doesn't know the teacher. So he trains his firearm on the armed teacher, thinking that she may be a baddie too. While these two goofballs are in a Mexican stand-off, the actual intruder (who let's say has military training) shoots both of them and the other volunteer... takes their weapons and then starts on the kids. This stuff does not happen in slow motion, like in the movies. No one has time to sit & chat about the weather while it plays out. That's just one possible, troubling scenario that I see. Another concern that I have is that people without extensive SWAT training generally wouldn't be my first choice to have in a crowded, tense environment with a loaded firearm... well meaning though they may be.

Although I see these incidents as extremely tragic when they happen, the truth is, they do not happen all that often. And these knee-jerk, hastily thought out "solutions" don't seem to be very sound, IMO. So rather than devote people with actual police, paramilitary or SWAT training on these properties, some would turn loose a teacher, who is probably not emotionally prepared to deal with an armed combat confrontation, to deal with a combat/hostage situation. I'm not saying it would always end in tragedy. There may be that time when the teacher would handle it very well. But the risk is simply too high that this untrained individual would make a bad situation worse. There is also the question of securing the firearm throughout the day and still have it in a place where it is readily accessible. A firearm that you can't get to or (especially) one in the wrong hands is even worse than no firearm at all.

Over the years, I've had extensive firearms training. The person who taught me to shoot was a former military member, who was a cop and who went on to be in a Federal SWAT unit. And at least when I used to shoot a lot, I was a very good shot, with both pistols and rifles. And not to toot my own horn, but I'm generally not a person who scares easily or gets emotional at the drop of a hat. But none of that means that you'd want me wandering around the halls of a school, watching over your kiddies with my Glock on my hip. Compared to the average teacher, yeah, you'd probably want me. But in truth, you'd be better off without either one of us packin' heat in the local elementary school. If the problem is actually that real and that serious, then these people need to cough up the money and hire real deal security. All those guys coming back from the Middle East who can't find work... well, the ones who are emotionally sound and stable... hire some of them! Let teachers teach. Hopefully, that's what they do best.

[donKey jote]

Don't worry... the volunteers are being trained by Steven Seagal :up:

:dozey:

[Rollo]

How long would it take for some students to work out how to devise a plan to steal the guns from their teachers?
If you had a student with a grudge against other students, then it gives them a nice opportunity to work out how to take them all out.

What happens if said teacher just flips out one day? They already have to work in a stressful environment with 20 or more sprogs. Letting them take a gun to school could help them to even out those numbers.

[steveaki13]

How long would it take for some students to work out how to devise a plan to steal the guns from their teachers?
If you had a student with a grudge against other students, then it gives them a nice opportunity to work out how to take them all out.

What happens if said teacher just flips out one day? They already have to work in a stressful environment with 20 or more sprogs. Letting them take a gun to school could help them to even out those numbers.

This.

It seems those who favour the guns approach fail to see this staring them in the face.

[TheFamousEccles]

How long would it take for some students to work out how to devise a plan to steal the guns from their teachers?
If you had a student with a grudge against other students, then it gives them a nice opportunity to work out how to take them all out.

What happens if said teacher just flips out one day? They already have to work in a stressful environment with 20 or more sprogs. Letting them take a gun to school could help them to even out those numbers.

My thoughts exactly!

[airshifter]

There are two sides to the coin, but most won't admit that and state only their side of the coin.

Downsides are making sure proper training, background checks, psychological tests, etc are as close as possible to being failsafe. Otherwise you have allowed a person to carry a weapon into a school.

But done properly such as with cops, is any idiot going to go into a school knowing how many armed people they might face? When has a nutter gone to a police station, military barracks or other more likely to be armed location and started shooting it up... and did the damage done against unarmed people?

Think about it.

[Starter]

What happens if said teacher just flips out one day? They already have to work in a stressful environment with 20 or more sprogs. Letting them take a gun to school could help them to even out those numbers.
I'd look at it as a good thing. Those "problem" kids won't be bothering anyone again and taxes can be reduced as there are fewer students to pay for. A win, win all around.

[Gregor-y]

It's not a big deal since there are no people in South Dakota. Just Wall Drug, Mount Rushmore and the Corn Palace.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Here's how arms work with kids. Yesterday my little one declared he was the boss in the family. I took up my sword (a drumstick, actually), challenged him to a sword fight, defeated him soundly (yet harmlessly) and showed him who's the real boss. In the U.S. kids are tougher, so carrying guns to discipline students must be perfectly okay.

[Knock-on]

And allowing ever more guns into schools isn't equally as bad, if not worse? Certainly, it does nothing to work towards a long-term solution to gun violence in schools. It's a bit like seeking to tackle paedophilia by giving every school its own child sex offender.

Ben, I'm being a bit tongue in cheek in this thread as having guns round kids seems obscene to me but while you have such an ingrained gun culture, it seems folly to say schools should be a no gun area where only the law abiding people will comply.

There is no logical answer apart from finding a way of removing guns from the population and tht's not going to happen so whats the point of trying to limit one specific area? Rather than your analogy about Pedophiles, I suggest it's more like sticking a finger in a Dyke.

[BDunnell]

There is no logical answer apart from finding a way of removing guns from the population and tht's not going to happen so whats the point of trying to limit one specific area?

Because the cumulative effect can only be negative. How does this proposal do anything to solve the problem, as opposed to further normalise it?

[Starter]

Because the cumulative effect can only be negative. How does this proposal do anything to solve the problem, as opposed to further normalise it?
As usual, you are going after the wrong problem - if it is even a problem. Once again all the left leaning people are talking about banning guns in some, or all, situations (schools in this case). Guns are NOT the problem. Mentally disturbed people ARE the problem. Yet no one wants to tackle that issue. Stop taking the lazy person's approach and start addressing the real issue.

[henners88]

I'm to the point in this debate where I have to ask myself if I care or not? I'm never going to move to America and hopefully British schools won't introduce a 'teachers with guns' program to protect them. Unless our government introduce a system that changes the whole dynamic of our society by insisting we all own guns, this sort of thing has no impact on us whatsoever. Our opinions aren't going to change laws across the pond as there isn't a problem there in their opinion anyway. If this story hadn't been highlighted by this forum I probably would have skipped past it on the BBC news site much like I do when gun massacres are reported. Nothing really shocks anymore and we should be grateful we live in a society where we all feel safe.

[BDunnell]

As usual, you are going after the wrong problem - if it is even a problem. Once again all the left leaning people are talking about banning guns in some, or all, situations (schools in this case). Guns are NOT the problem. Mentally disturbed people ARE the problem. Yet no one wants to tackle that issue. Stop taking the lazy person's approach and start addressing the real issue.

'Here we go', I might say. It is simply untrue that 'no-one wants to tackle' the issue of mentally disturbed people. Just because we don't say it doesn't mean we don't want it to happen. The lazier approach is merely to accept the status quo regarding firearms.

[EuroTroll]

As usual, you are going after the wrong problem - if it is even a problem. Once again all the left leaning people are talking about banning guns in some, or all, situations (schools in this case). Guns are NOT the problem. Mentally disturbed people ARE the problem. Yet no one wants to tackle that issue. Stop taking the lazy person's approach and start addressing the real issue.

I don't think there is any way to "tackle" the issue of mentally disturbed people. They will always be around - end of story IMO.


But done properly such as with cops, is any idiot going to go into a school knowing how many armed people they might face? When has a nutter gone to a police station, military barracks or other more likely to be armed location and started shooting it up... and did the damage done against unarmed people?

Give the good guys a fighting chance, eh? I do approve of the principle. Now, this whole thing might be a bad idea, but America is about good principles, isn't it, even if they cause tremendous problems. So, why not indeed?

[schmenke]

Who are we to judge that this is a bad idea? Publically elected officials, who are supposedly best suited to evaluate the situation, have proposed this as the ideal solution within the parameters of U.S. society and their legislation. Surely then this is a good idea.

[EuroTroll]

Who are we to judge that this is a bad idea?

We are men-on-internet. How dare you question our collective authoritah?? :devil: :p

[donKey jote]

There are two sides to the coin, but most won't admit that and state only their side of the coin.

Downsides are making sure proper training, background checks, psychological tests, etc are as close as possible to being failsafe. Otherwise you have allowed a person to carry a weapon into a school.

But done properly such as with cops, is any idiot going to go into a school knowing how many armed people they might face? When has a nutter gone to a police station, military barracks or other more likely to be armed location and started shooting it up... and did the damage done against unarmed people?

Think about it.
Surely this is a bad idea :p
Steven Seagal Training Sheriff Joe Arpaio (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/02/steven-seagal-training-sheriff-joe-arpaios-posse-on-school-security/)

[MrJan]

As usual, you are going after the wrong problem - if it is even a problem. Once again all the left leaning people are talking about banning guns in some, or all, situations (schools in this case). Guns are NOT the problem. Mentally disturbed people ARE the problem. Yet no one wants to tackle that issue. Stop taking the lazy person's approach and start addressing the real issue.

It's a case of deciding which is the bigger problem once you take the other away. For example if you took away mentally disturbed people you would still have vengeful and stupid people capable of using guns. You take away guns and you're still left with mentally disturbed people, vengeful people and stupid people, it's just that they have to resort to knives/bats/bricks etc. etc.

I do think that the US gets quite a hard time over their gun laws/opinions/statistics, although there is no doubt in my mind that a large amount of it is deserved. This article has an interesting table at the bottom. If you sort the data by % of homicides by firearm then there are some surprising results. There are predictably some third world and heavily cartel led countries near the top, but I didn't expect Switzerland and Italy to be so high up the table.

Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country | News | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list)

[steveaki13]

Who are we to judge that this is a bad idea? Publically elected officials, who are supposedly best suited to evaluate the situation, have proposed this as the ideal solution within the parameters of U.S. society and their legislation. Surely then this is a good idea.

Might be because it is the easiest solution, but it is not the best.

Probably to much effort to make the changes needed to rid America of its gun culture. Politicians are just like most others. Try the easiest solution before the most effective.

[Jag_Warrior]

Much like the fantasy that simply putting some words on a piece of paper (i.e. a law which is no more enforceable than the ones we already have) would cure this problem, this is also a knee-jerk reaction, only from the the pro-gun crowd instead of the pro-gun control crowd. Having been well versed in firearms for most of my time on this planet, I know that putting a firearm in the hands of an untrained person, and thinking that person is going to be able to handle a fire fight or a tense situation, is like giving a machine gun to a baby. Sure, he'll be able to fire it. But the results may be problematic, if not tragic.

Stupid idea.

[airshifter]

Great points Jag, and the article does in fact mention a training program that has oversight by a law enforcement commission. Hopefully they at least give the proper training.

[anthonyvop]

You guy act like teachers don't already bring guns with them. I know many teachers and I know that many of them who teach in "rougher" neighborhoods carry guns with them.

[Knock-on]

Perhaps a gun issued to every new born is the way to go. Of course, you must ensure all parents pack iron to ensure safety.

Oh he'll, I've figured out I really don't care anymore. Let the yanks do what they want. I only have to spend a week or two there each year so let them get on with it.

My apathy gland has taken over and any desire to discuss this rationally, again, has flown out the window

[airshifter]

Perhaps a gun issued to every new born is the way to go. Of course, you must ensure all parents pack iron to ensure safety.

Oh he'll, I've figured out I really don't care anymore. Let the yanks do what they want. I only have to spend a week or two there each year so let them get on with it.

My apathy gland has taken over and any desire to discuss this rationally, again, has flown out the window

I'm glad that you have finally accepted that our country won't be influenced much by internet discussions. The reality is that every country does stupid things at time, and in this instance it hasn't yet even proven to be stupid. :)

[Alfa Fan]

Why don't we arm the kids as well? In case the teacher turns on their class. Only safe thing to do IMO.

[Starter]

Why don't we arm the kids as well? In case the teacher turns on their class. Only safe thing to do IMO.
Because the littler ones have trouble holding the gun and aiming properly. Perhaps grenades would work. They don't require skill to use and, though also heavy, can be carried in the kiddies' backpacks. I'll vote for that one.

[Dave B]

Because the littler ones have trouble holding the gun and aiming properly. Perhaps grenades would work. They don't require skill to use and, though also heavy, can be carried in the kiddies' backpacks. I'll vote for that one.
That makes no less sense than some of the ideas I've heard recently! :p