Texas School District Will Let Teachers Carry Guns

  • Thread starter Thread starter stanmaxkolbe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You don’t understand the concept of likelihoods, and so it all seems the same to you. But it’s not. For some people, it’s a very difficult thing to grasp. Which is why they do astoundingly risky things, while obsessing over something highly unlikely.
You could live in a very good neighborhood with a 1% murder rate and you could be unlucky enough to have your life touched by that 1% and you could live in a bad neighborhood with a 10% murder rate and you could be lucky enough to have your life never touched by it.
 
There are far more kids shot accidentally by handguns than are ever injured by attackers in school. Adding more guns is a bit like mining your yard to stop axe murderers.
And how do these shootings happen? The teacher’s gun would be secure in their holster unless there was a reason to draw it. Last time I checked, guns didn’t jump out of holsters by themselves and start shooting people.
 
There are schools that are dangerous enough that it is a reasonable thing to have armed guards. It would be preferrable to have professionals, rather than arm teachers, however.
I would agree, it would be my preference to have professionals around to protect my child. But if the school district didn’t have the money to provide for that then what is the option?

In this case the school district doesn’t have the money. Nor did it ‘arm’ the teachers. It simply set forth a list of qualifications that are very similar to the qualifications that ‘armed professionals’ must achieve, then it said if you are a faculty member in our district, and you can qualify, and you are approved, then we will allow you to act as a volunteer to protect the children.

I’d accept a ‘professionally qualified’ volunteer to protect my child any day of the week.

You’ve acknowledged that you’d accept a professional. Other than pay, what is the difference between the volunteers and the professionals in terms of qualifications? None that I can see.
 
I would agree, it would be my preference to have professionals around to protect my child. But if the school district didn’t have the money to provide for that then what is the option?

In this case the school district doesn’t have the money. Nor did it ‘arm’ the teachers. It simply set forth a list of qualifications that are very similar to the qualifications that ‘armed professionals’ must achieve, then it said if you are a faculty member in our district, and you can qualify, and you are approved, then we will allow you to act as a volunteer to protect the children.

I’d accept a ‘professionally qualified’ volunteer to protect my child any day of the week.

You’ve acknowledged that you’d accept a professional. Other than pay, what is the difference between the volunteers and the professionals in terms of qualifications? None that I can see.
That is a good and valid point…
 
Indeed. There are schools that are dangerous enough that it is a reasonable thing to have armed guards. It would be preferrable to have professionals, rather than arm teachers, however.
But what if a Teacher has the same training as the professionals?

But its not about the training is it?
 
But it’s not about the kids, is it?
Yes, it really is. Anyone who has every had the responsiblity to protect others knows this. This statement is like telling doctors that his job is not really about his patients. Most teachers really do care about the kids first, as do most school boards.

One other statement shows that you do not understand what protecting others is truly all about. That is your use of the rarity of school shootings as a reason to not prepare for it. I do not fault you, as no one here is an expert in more than a field or two. But those who protect others must prepare for the rare scenario. It is the unlikely and uncommon that catch most organizations off guard. A school should not need a shooting in their own backyard to plan for extreme situations. By the time that happens, it is too late.
 
Great. My freshman year high school math teacher would have shot someone. He drank straight vodka out of a flask in the hallway during class. He would come back into the classroom screaming at us, and when he fell on his desk knocking all the books off it he started throwing them at us telling us to “stop messing up his desk” The boys told us he smoked cigarettes openly in the bathroom. Even offered them to some.

If he only had a gun.:eek:
 
Barbarian notes that it really isn’t about the kids, it’s about an agenda.
Yes, it really is. Anyone who has every had the responsiblity to protect others knows this. This statement is like telling doctors that his job is not really about his patients.
No, it’s like telling a doctor that his job is not really to shoot intruders. 😃
Most teachers really do care about the kids first, as do most school boards.
Most of them don’t bring weapons to school.
One other statement shows that you do not understand what protecting others is truly all about. That is your use of the rarity of school shootings as a reason to not prepare for it.
So the rarity of drownings (which are much, much more common than school shootings should mean we must put life preservers on all students?
I do not fault you, as no one here is an expert in more than a field or two.
You’re a certified CSP, and know all about risk prevention? I got my CSP through examination. How about you?
But those who protect others must prepare for the rare scenario. It is the unlikely and uncommon that catch most organizations off guard.
So teachers need to be trained lifeguards in addition to requiring life preservers? It would save more lives than arming teachers.
 
Barbarian observes:
Indeed. There are schools that are dangerous enough that it is a reasonable thing to have armed guards. It would be preferrable to have professionals, rather than arm teachers, however.
But what if a Teacher has the same training as the professionals?
If he can make it through a police academy. If not, let’s leave it to people who actually know what to do.
But its not about the training is it?
For you, maybe.
 
If he can make it through a police academy. If not, let’s leave it to people who actually know what to do.
Professional Security Guards do not have to make it through the police academy, they can be armed. Are you against having security guards who are armed?

What is the agenda that you claim it is about?
 
(Barbarian observes that people who don’t understand the concept of relative risk will always be making dangerous choices)
You could live in a very good neighborhood with a 1% murder rate and you could be unlucky enough to have your life touched by that 1% and you could live in a bad neighborhood with a 10% murder rate and you could be lucky enough to have your life never touched by it.
Whoa. A neighborhood with a 1% murder rate is “very good?” That’s one person out of a hundred murdered every year. Baghdad is better than that.
 
(Barbarian observes that people who don’t understand the concept of relative risk will always be making dangerous choices)

Whoa. A neighborhood with a 1% murder rate is “very good?” That’s one person out of a hundred murdered every year. Baghdad is better than that.
By any chance are you Bob Dole? He also talked about himself in third person.
 
Professional Security Guards do not have to make it through the police academy, they can be armed.
Blackwater guards, for example. They got extensive training, but not police academy. Results haven’t been so good, um?
Are you against having security guards who are armed?
If it comes to children, I’d rather have police officers. At least they know what they are doing.
 
(Barbarian observes that people who don’t understand the concept of relative risk will always be making dangerous choices)

Sir Knight writes:
You could live in a very good neighborhood with a 1% murder rate and you could be unlucky enough to have your life touched by that 1% and you could live in a bad neighborhood with a 10% murder rate and you could be lucky enough to have your life never touched by it.
Barbarian exclaims:
Whoa. A neighborhood with a 1% murder rate is “very good?” That’s one person out of a hundred murdered every year. Baghdad is better than that.
By any chance are you Bob Dole?
No, he had a lot of trouble with estimation, too.
 
Blackwater guards, for example. They got extensive training, but not police academy. Results haven’t been so good, um?

If it comes to children, I’d rather have police officers. At least they know what they are doing.
Really they do?
 
Great. My freshman year high school math teacher would have shot someone. He drank straight vodka out of a flask in the hallway during class. He would come back into the classroom screaming at us, and when he fell on his desk knocking all the books off it he started throwing them at us telling us to “stop messing up his desk” The boys told us he smoked cigarettes openly in the bathroom. Even offered them to some.

If he only had a gun.:eek:
How many kids were shot to death in your school during your freshman year?

If the answer is none, then may we safely assume things might have changed a bit since then? Maybe you might have a few more violent or crazy students, and a few less alcholic teachers?
 
Worst that ever happened to me was getting whacked upside the head with a plastic hockey stick by a grade school teacher.

That engendered another personal trip to school by my father, the psychotic Pacific vet----one of several where he went into the principal’s office, and when he walked out, they all had faces the color of mozzarella cheese, were sweating profusely, and violently trembling.

I never got clobbered with a hockey stick again. Never could figure out why. 😛

Go get 'em, Dad! 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top