Walther Forums banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Official Site Vendor
Joined
·
151 Posts
Discussion Starter #1


Over a dozen states specifically authorize teachers, principals, and other school officials from carrying concealed on school grounds. While some districts may not specifically provision it, many of those teachers aren't required to disclose whether or not they are carrying.

It's been suggested that teachers be allowed to concealed carry and be given instruction, not unlike air marshals. This would add an extra layer of security in the school system in case of a mass shooter or emergence of some other threat. However, some also wonder if that is a viable solution. After all, schools are gun-free zones…

Is this recent push making our schools safer or opening another can of worms?

Continue reading at: Should Teachers Carry Concealed Firearms? - Alien Gear Holsters Blog
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
618 Posts
One of the questions I have is how does a student or non-student get in the door with a slew of weapons and go unnoticed? Perhaps and unfortunately it may be time to treat schools just like other venues and have one or two ways into them and screen people as they come in. A voluntary approach to teachers, custodians, resource officers being able to conceal carry would be fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,859 Posts
The assertion that "in most cases, [civilian carriers are] legally required to get" training is simply untrue. I hate reading articles by supposedly informed folks that make basic factual errors. There are jurisdictions that require training, but they are not in the majority. All the Constitutional Carry states do not and most of the CC Licensing states do not. I do agree its preferable that someone handling firearms get training the safe use of firearms.
"a civilian carrier should (and in most cases, is legally required to) get concealed carry training,"Continue reading at: Should Teachers Carry Concealed Firearms? - Alien Gear Holsters Blog
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Absolutely YES!..if they have the desire and fortitude to carry the responsibility of using said firearm, should the need arise. The state of Indiana made a step in the right direction a few years ago. A law was passed that allowed for the legal possession of a firearm on school property, though it must be unloaded and ammo in a separate area of the vehicle...that part is nonsense. I am the designer/painter for a gymnasium floor refinishing company and I find myself in schools for several months out of the year. I have always had my carry gun with me in transit to the job site. It has always stayed in the vehicle locked up tight. The reason I used to have it was because of the areas travelled through, not to mention 2A. My reasoning for having access to my firearm has evolved into a just-in-case situation. I have made peace with the idea that, should the need arise, I will retrieve my gun and do my best. I know I'm going to deal with the very evident possibility of entering the prison system, but my conscience won't allow me to huddle in a gym and listen to...pop, pop, pop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
First, as a disclaimer, I am a teacher. I mention Kansas and Utah because I teach in Kansas; however, my residence is in Utah. I posted this on another forum. Here are some thoughts of mine on the topic. I sniped the non-relevant parts.

Sorry if the huge wall of quotes bothers you, it is just a collection of some if my posts and I don't have the time to retype what I have already written.

Allow the teachers, and administrators, who are otherwise permitted to receive appropriate, and accessible, training and carry firearms if they choose to do so. The model needs to change from Kansas's "districts may allow" to Utah's "districts may not forbid." Utah also has other requirements, such as a requirement that the firearm not be visible on normal teaching activities and the like; but the point remains that, with reasonable care and appropriate licensing, teachers are permitted the choice of not being unarmed targets and the opportunity to actively defend their charges if necessary.

Of course, I realize that most states are even further from the Kansas "district may allow," legislation (as of date, to the best of my knowledge, no district does allow). Some states even make it clear that "No district may allow." There is still a lot of movement to be made.

Do I think every teacher should carry a firearm? No, some are clearly not qualified. However, in conversations, those who are clearly unqualified seem to be quick to self select and choose not to carry a firearm. In no way would I support "district may require." However, that is a long way from "District must not forbid." For those who have made it to this point and are asking, "what does this have to do with the militia?" Those teachers are the militia.
As a teacher, I gave this some thought, but the bottom line is I would eventually get caught and a.) it's a felony - 5 yrs in the slammer, and b.)I'd lose my job. Given the extreme rarity of violence in schools that would require a firearm, I felt it not worth the risk.
This is the same decision that I, as a teacher made. I am aware of two teachers in my building who carry; but frankly, there appears to be a greater tolerance for women who carry illegally than for men. If our district allowed it I know more who would.

I teach in Kansas. Kansas allows the districts to decide if teachers can carry. However, the insurance carrier in Kansas has said, "no." As such, no teachers carry legally. By comparison, Utah addressed the situation differently. Instead of the "district may allow" as seen in Kansas, Utah passed "district may not forbid." Teachers in Utah a required to keep their firearm concealed. Incredibly enough, this has not resulted in any great catastrophe.

So, now you know another teacher who would carry if it were legal. However, I would attend a training course. There are several for teachers. That brings up a direction I would like to see the issue of teacher firearm training to go, real and appropriate firearm training for teachers. I am not asking for three days of, "don't shoot your students." I would like to see marksmanship coaching and training focused on shooting in chaotic situations.

While I see it as essential that the training be available and affordable, I would like to see those teachers also trained to the basic EMT standard. Yes, this training would eat a better part of a summer; however, it would be a direction toward a teacher first responder certification.

As you can see, I am not entirely in favor of Utah's "sure, you can carry a gun" policy. Then, I am not in favor of "no guns" either. I want to see training that is appropriate and affordable. I will tell you that my research has shown that there are teacher firearm courses available. The next step is to decide on a minimum level of training, insuring it is, as I have said several times, appropriate and affordable and to then allow those teachers to be armed.
First, as I have mentioned in the past I am a teacher. With that out of the way, there are two different issues being raised. . . does the current model provide cost effective and quality education.

Increasing security in our schools. Due to the training that the teachers and students have received, the number of casualties in the Rancho Tehama incident were minimized. Certainly, no casualties is the goal; however, reduced casualties is a step in the right direction. I have been looking at the teacher and administrator firearms training provided by the Buckeye Firearms Foundation called Faculty/Administrator Safety Training and Emergency Response (F.A.S.T.E.R.). I do not have enough information about this program, at this time, to make any recommendations.

There does need to be a nationally recognized program for certifying teachers and administrators with firearms. This is largely due to the insurance carriers unwillingness to cover districts that allow teachers to make their own decisions about firearms, in states where this is allowed by law. I would like to see the schools policies change from Kansas's, "district may allow," to Utah's, "district may not forbid." However, I do recognize that some states have even further to go.
Since I posted this, it was brought to my attention that a sheriff's department near me, in Utah, has a seven week "critical event" course for teachers. I am looking into it now

This issue seems to be gaining traction. I just had a couple of non-shooting, not anti, just non, teachers ask me my position in this issue. The inquiry was unprompted and my position was taken seriously.

I think my nuanced position did surprise them as I am generally a bit to the left of most of the teachers here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Thank you Hasaf for doing your part to keep our kids safe.

I heard yesterday that 92% of recent mass shootings have been in gun-free zones. To me the most effective and easiest solution would be to eliminate most gun-free zones. If you were a piece of crap criminal looking to do something like this would this be one of your first thoughts on planning your crime? What resistance will I face? Of course it would. If the answer is always deadly resistance by other citizens, how many crimes would be stopped right there in the planning stages? We're not talking about bold, courageous people here, we're talking about weak, cowardly people with evil and hate in their hearts. The statistics speak for themselves on crime in areas with stricter citizen gun restrictions.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,560 Posts
^^^^^Yep, a gun free zone is nothing but a 'hunting ground' for the bad guys.

It could be like this.



Or this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,759 Posts
"92% of recent mass shootings have been in gun-free zones"

If I'm not mistaken, the actual figure is 98.4%.

Sh!tbag mass shooters HATE it when victims shoot back. Go figure!
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top