Incoming lawmaker proposes arming teachers
SALMON CREEK, Wash. – An incoming state representative from Camas is considering a proposal to change state law to allow guns in schools.
Republican Liz Pike wants to bring up a bill that would let teachers carry concealed guns in the classroom.
Under Pike's proposal, teachers at schools like Salmon Creek Elementary could volunteer to go through mental evaluations and week-long gun training at their own expense. They would also buy their own guns to bring into their classes and wear on a belt or in a holster – not in a purse or drawer.
Every school district would get to choose if teachers can carry weapons. Pike said it would be confidential and only law enforcement and the superintendent would know which teachers have weapons.
"They're designed to be concealed, and in a perfect situation a student will never see that gun," Pike said.
She posted her idea on her Facebook page, asking for feedback. She said it would be like the federal program for pilots that started after 9/11 where they can volunteer to train and carry.
Pike believes that mentally ill people would then understand that schools are not gun-free zones and they would not want to attack them like the shooter did in Sandy Hook.
"There is a possibility that there will be a teacher protecting those children and there might be somebody (the teacher) shooting back," Pike said. "It's basically a message to the mentally ill people that would do these terrible things to our children in our schools."
But some other state representatives disagree.
"I think we just need to be better prepared to handle the mental health issues that come up," said Rep.-elect Monica Stonier, D-Vancouver. "People who are looking for ways to hurt other people will do that whether there is a gun around or not. So we need to be approaching that from a mental health perspective."
Stonier said she supports the Second Amendment but believes guns in schools would not make kids safer.
"That's not fool proof, and to have guns in a classroom with my children, or anybody's children, when the focus isn't on gun safety and education. And focus is supposed to be on education. That's a problem for me."
She said there's not enough focus on dealing with mental health issues.
Pike said she also supports mental health solutions but said that will take a long time and there's no time to wait.
Pike will start her work in the Legislature Jan. 14. She said at least five other lawmakers in Washington have come up with similar ideas.
A properly trained and vetted adult SHOULD be able to conceal carry on campus because when these CRIMINALS who are intent on committing a crime and do not care about your little "gun free zone" laws and signs pick a place to commit their crime, they always pick a place where they know no one will be able to shoot back. When seconds count, police are minutes away!!! In the meantime, more innocent people are being shot like fish in a barrel because liberals live in their utopian la la land instead of REALITY. They actually believe that banning all guns will keep criminals (who BTW don't give a rat's a** about your little laws) from getting weapons. Grow up liberals.
Not only that, but she's hot.
Oh yeah, Â a kindergarten kid gets kicked out of school for having a toy gun, but the teacher gets a permit. Â Huh?
The toy gun thing is silly, but utterly unrelated to the argument. Really a stupid, stupid comment. @Terrence Zander
 @Terrence Zander You ARE aware that adults and children are different, and different rules apply to them, right?
 @RN1  @Terrence Zander After all, this is America! Different rules also apply to the rich than apply to the poor. Ditto for political figures. Ever wonder how it is that judges and high level politicians always seem to avoid DUI convictions after blowing about 0.20 BAC?
 @Eduardo Capistrano  @RN1  @Terrence Zander Don't know... I will ask Randy Dorn and the other democrats
 @Eduardo Capistrano  @Terrence Zander Yup, there is that, too. Because some animals are more equal that others.
Isn't it funny how two or three dozen people were shot and killed on Chicago's South Side every single weekend during 2012 but nobody seemed to really care? Ditto for many other American cities, albeit in smaller numbers. All of a sudden one school is shot up in Connecticut and everybody wants to jump up, arm all the teachers, propose more gun restrictions, etc., etc.
Â
Maybe we ought to really look a little deeper at our American culture for the answers. Travel to places like Europe and you will see a real sense of community in their cities. Neighbors actually know each other and socialize together. Higher taxes fund mental health care needs of the less fortunate. Almost everyone can earn at least a living wage. Reduced disparity of income and wealth means the governments truly are democracies, rather than the plutocracy we have created here in the U.S.
Â
Here in the U.S. everything is all about how to make the corporate elite more wealthy at the expense of everyone else. How can we force rank-and-file employees to work more hours, reduce their pay, lay them off. How can we further reduce the taxes of the rich? Then when the corporate elite (i.e. Wall Street types) trip all over themselves and fail, how can we use tax revenue, which should have been spent on mental health care services, to bail them out. When you put all these things together, should we really expect anything other that what we currently have here?
 @Eduardo Capistrano and they have some of the strictest gun control laws in the country... So how does THAT happen???  Â
 @Eduardo Capistrano People DO care. But the problem is that the pols of Chicago desire *control*, not *solutions*. Their proposals do NOT solve the problem, they make it worse, and in so doing it gives them a reason to demand MORE control, so they can DO SOMETHING. A solution that gives the pols LESS power is, to them, anathema, because it cuts into their power, i.e., their "turf," which they guard as jealously as any gang.
Â
All choices involve trade-offs, and the goal *should* be to get the greatest gains for the most people at the least cost. But most pols have a goal that is increase their power at any cost. A simple free-market solution like allowing teachers to arm themselves limits their power, empowers the lowest on the totem pole, and involves no taxes or spending, so it is to be fought. Basic human psych at work.
Go for it, it is a better idea than putting signs up that say gun free zone. Politicians love to talk and make laws instead of solving the problem of mentally ill, and those that lean towards criminal acts. If we quit making excuses for people and blaming others for peoples choices and hold individuals responsible for thier choices.
Great idea, we need to protect our children with something more effective then a "Gun free zone' sign and Gun Control only disarms those who are law abiding.
 @Christine Oh, you mean those "Gun Free Zone" signs aren't effective at anything? Any teenaged kid knows that the best place to buy pot is inside the limits of "Drug Free Zone" signs; that is, right on school grounds. ;-))
What a sad day for America. We're so worried about terrorism, and have launched foreign wars to stop it. But the real enemy is us. We have found the enemy, and it is us.
Â
Â
 @Bellevue Scott Exactly!! We have spent between $2 trillion and $3 trillion during the past 11 years fighting "terrorists" in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now we find out that the real enemy is right here in our our backyard, born and raised right here!
This is the most ridiculus,scary idea ever heard.I am a teacher,almost 40 years, in the Netherlands.When they will say that I have to carry a gun:I quit my job immediatly.This is a sad ,a very sad idea from that woman.You don`t solve problems by carring a gun or an other arm.By doing this you will bring more hate among people.And we ,as teachers ,must be an example for ourstudents and an example don`t have guns or any other arm..And I think that the parents don`t armed teachers at school.Than if the children see that te teachers have arms they think that they are allowed too to have arms.And young people always sees their teacher as a role-model.You will sow discord when this will be reality.
 @Grietje Blaauw-Stokebroek Here is some advice that you Europeans LOVE to give us Americans - mind your own business. As I understand it, you in the Netherlands are having a problem with your Muslims so why don't you just worry about your own country.
Â
No one is forcing anyone to carry a weapon. Only properly trained and vetted adults will have that CHOICE. And I am willing to bet that you folks wish you were armed when a certain Austrian rolled through your neck of the woods in the 1930s'/40's
 @Grietje Blaauw-Stokebroek You're in luck. This does not require a teacher to be armed. It allows a teacher to be armed. They also are not required to dye their hair purple or listen to Justin Bieber, but they may if they'd like.
 @Grietje Blaauw-Stokebroek Wow, such a collection of mis-information and utter bilge.
Â
- This is not a requirement to carry. It is allowing teachers and staff who wish and who pass the training to carry. Are you clear about the difference?
Â
- Violence, or the threat of violence, has resolved more issues than any other. When a savage decides to hurt you only violence deters that savage. Violence was the only way that the nazis were defeated and the threat of violence was the only way to defeat the USSR. Dutch troops have served in many, many wars with honor and distinction.
Â
- teaching children to be defenseless is truly evil. If  we want a society of victims that is the way to go about it.
Â
- many, many schools have armed security (police, private security, etc.). What do the students think when they see these armed guards? Probably that their teachers who speak of never using violence are hypocrites since the teachers would be the first to request violence of the security guards.
Â
It is disturbing to read such a post from a teacher. Differing about the effectiveness of armed teachers and staff is reasonable. Asserting foolish utopianism like "You don`t solve problems by carring a gun or an other arm." is irresponsible.
 @Iconoclast  @Grietje Blaauw-Stokebroek using nazi's as an example of the reason to arm citizens.... love it.
Â
the nra has really become a fringe entity full of half cocked weirdos
 @sunnysandiego  @Iconoclast And some of think the left's desire to ignore or amend the constitution without understanding it is pretty pathetic, too, because it shows you have a really weak grasp of history and human psych. The balance struck in the Constitution and the original BoR is explicitly a to hold those lessons in human nature in check against one another, by making them compete, rather than conspire, to acquire power.
Â
As for the NRA being a dying breed, membership is up. (Too, conservatives tend to have more children highly-educated liberals, though HS drop-out liberals breed at a higher rate, but that would be as much a problem for you as me).
Â
Your "explanation" of his Nazi reference clearly indicates that you did NOT understand his meaning, or at least it seems clear to ME. His point was that the left often says "violence never solves anything," his point was that often it is the ONLY thing that resolves an issue, by stopping / killing a person / people with evil intent, or at least deterring them- note that Chamberlain's paper did NOT provide "peace in our time," it was A-bombs. If someone is shooting at you, depressurizing his circulatory system or disconnecting his CNS is a *great* way of getting him to quit... *much* more effective than a drum circle or a kumbaya chorus, or rapping about how misunderstood he must be.
 @sunnysandiego I cannot believe you insist on embarrassing yourself like that. Too much time in the sun without a hat?
Â
If you are trying to agree with Ms. numbnuts there regarding the utopian assertion that guns--and, by extension, violence--never solve a problem then you have much larger problems than an inability to read for comprehension. You have a fundamental disagreement with reality.
Â
As for the NRA--its numbers are growing. More and more Americans of both parties are joining. Impotent claims about dying off are just pitifully amusing, rather like you.
 @Iconoclast I read it.  outdated outmoded just like the 2nd amendment which everyone in the nra loves to hug.
Â
Love how you guys hold on to the old stuff when it best suits your wishes but are quick to get rid of outright or amend anything as not valid today when it also suits your wishes to do so.
Â
Since you are not smart enough to figure out what I was saying, my intent was indicating you have to pull examples from the Nazi infiltration of Germany as examples of why we need guns. Â Your NRA is a dying breed.
 @sunnysandiego You never have learned to read for comprehension, have you. Pathetic.
Training yes, arming, not yet...need mor time on this.
in sacramento we have school with armed police and talk about worthless,there has been taseing & student beatings by cop because thought they had weapon ,they chased another student an said he made move to belt so cop shot an killed him.turned out kids none had guns an schools has lawsuits pending in millions. don't believe it look up Rivercity school district,just think of what damage armed teacher could do in panic ?
 @Mercedes Blankenship And that's teh difference between cops and teachers. Teachers are there to teach, and maybe deal with a problem if it crops up. Cops are there, getting bored, LOOKING for problems. Teachers have enough to do without going out looking for problems. Stick a company of first-rate combat troops in garrison for a while, and you get lots of discipline problems. Put them out in the field to kill bad guys, and they get it done. The problems you have with cops patrolling schools is because they are *cops*, not because they are armed.
 @Mercedes Blankenship An interesting statistic has come out over the years regarding use of force by police versus armed citizen. It turns out that armed citizens make dramatically fewer errors identifying innocent people than do the police (one fifth as much, according to Forbes/Newsweek). This is likely because armed citizens are on the spot, while police inevitably show up later and have to catch up (police error rate is remarkably low given that).
Â
This is extrapolation but I cannot help but wonder if teachers, much more familiar with the students, might be less likely to make errors like this.
Â
I don't know how much trouble happens in Riverside school to justify police officers on the campus but it must be bad enough for the police and the school district to station officers there. Would it be better to have no officers at all?Â
 @Mercedes Blankenship Exactly. You reap what you sew. So if we create a war zone in our schools, then that's what we'll get. Teachers packing guns in holsters is the dumbest idea I've heard in a long time.
 @Bellevue Scott  @Mercedes Blankenship Right. A war zone would be terrible. A gun-free zone, where gun-toting idiots know they can kill without resistance is what we need. It's working so well, there's no reason to change.Â
This comment has been deleted
 @Wolfen Who are you, the grammer/spelling police? This is a public forum, open to everyone, no matter how well they spell. Grammer/spelling doesn't make the point any less valid.
 @Mercedes Blankenship Bingo.  Putting a gun into a teachers hand is an awful idea.  the nra pipe dream of a hero gun totting shooter killing the bad guy is movie material.  The reality is the teacher's gun will get taken by some wacko student po'd over something trivial, the teacher will end up dead and there will be other students shot by the very weapon designed to protect them.  That scenario will happen way more than the use of the gun to save innocents.
Â
that is the very reason this is a sad idea and shows you why GWB quit his membership with an organization he held dear to his heart for most of his life.
Â
They have become like big tobacco did in the 80's and they are doubling down on their stance which is starting to be picked apart by the majority of citizens.
Â
This is essentially the beginning of the end of the nra as we know it today.
Â
Trust me on this one.
 @sunnysandiego  @Mercedes Blankenship Actually, it's reality. More lives are saved than ended by guns every year. It's a fact.
I am a full time middle school teacher and have taught for about 12 years. I've worked in several districts in and out of state. I taught high school as well as elementary in the past. I am for arming teachers that have the desire, have passed necessary evaluations, and are qualified. I love my students and I teach over 150 of them. I have been in a lockdown situation at a junior high in Puyallup where we didn't leave until 9pm because of an at-large burglar just a couple blocks away. At my current teaching assignment, there are two teachers that I know would be more than qualified because of previous experience. We are all familiar with firearms. In fact, one is a veteran and former firearms instructor for the Army. I don't wish to publicize my firearms qualifications (prudency is a part of the training) but I can tell you that I have had extensive firearms training. I carry a gun everyday except when I'm at work. Just like brushing my teeth, it's just something I do. It has nothing to do with being macho or paranoia. It's a lifestyle. I've been in simulated stress situations like paintball/airsoft (yes, SWAT uses these tools to train too). I've also had experience where a burglar broke into my house where my wife was alone. All my experiences are real-life and do not come from some Hollywood hypothetical that many armchair posters like to speculate on what should or shouldn't be done; or what the liberal news media would try to make us think. The following is my opinion from my own thoughts. I also have a best friend who is a Trooper and another who is a Pierce County deputy. I have also gone through the processes of applying and going through screening process of becoming a law enforcement officer.
Teachers already pay out of pocket for their own professional development. It's nothing new. If it can be something subsidized, then awesome. We'll take it. There are already armed School Resource Officers (SRO); but many are shared between schools so they are only there part-time or on certain days. That's how it works in our district. My Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) friends flat out told me that most of the time they arrive on a shooting scene, that it has already happened. They are there to document and clean up the mess. They simply cannot prevent tragedies. They will happen. All my instructors who teach at the POST academy in Utah and Washington instructors have advocated for armed law-abiding citizens. A SWAT instructor said the best solution for an active shooter at school was to have an armed teacher.
Arming teachers in this state is not the solution but should be a part of the solution. We should also look into examining access to violent video games by children. Children and adults on forums and on Facebook have no problems with cutting each other down, taunting, bullying, and swearing with zero filters or manners. Allowing children to do that is affecting our kids and their ability to respect adults as well as their peers. You have kids on X-Box LIVE (the ability to play against one another with the capability to talk to them via voice audio) swearing at adults and each other as they taunt and simulate killing one another. In fact, they'll kill another on a first person shooter video game and then simulate raping them as they're taunting and swearing at them verbally online. Kids get angry and emotional online. Don't tell me that video games aren't affecting kids; yet the media refuse to cover these aspects of our society when a tragedy happens. Our children celebrate stupidity on YouTube (people experiencing "fails", strip teasing, fights/bullying, video clips of Jerry Springer, etc). Kids need to go outside, play, and interact with others in a positive environment and learn to be polite and settle differences if any arise. Part of the prevention solution would be to address what garbage our children are exposed to in their everyday lives.
Â
I DON'T advocate for ALL teachers being armed, but for SOME teachers being armed. It should be voluntary. There are qualified, willing, and mentally fit teachers that could easily fill the role. Teachers have an advantage over law enforcement because they have an intimate knowledge of the school layout as well as knowing many of the students. Some people say that teachers should teach; not be overburdened by extra training. Again, it would be of little burden since it is purely voluntary and it is likely that teacher doing this are more than happy to do the training. Being a human target tends to ruin any hopes of any students learning anyway. It's our God given right to protect ourselves and the ones we love. It shouldn't be decided by others that extra training is burdensome to teachers who want this training. That's all subjective. The armed teacher will have a set responsibility and moral responsibility to protect because it is their choice. The decision to shoot a bad guy is all made BEFORE becoming an armed teacher. If a teacher can't handle it, they don't have to be a volunteer. I found out early in my life and training (as a pilot and defensive shooter) that my natural tendency is to freeze in a panic situation. With training I overcame that. The key is training. Training should be done by LEO instructors and each teacher candidate should be evaluated by the instructors to gain an intimate knowledge of each candidate. From there, they would recommend or not recommend each candidate to the Superintendent and Principal. During an active shooter scenario, the teachers would wear jackets, caps, or some sort of identifying mark to show that they are a good guy. Undercover law enforcement officers do this already to identify each other. This was suggested by a SWAT instructor.
I see way too much misinformation and biased reporting of the news media. There are way too many what-if statements and scenarios that try to scare people into thinking that it is a bad idea. I could get into the FBI shoot/no shoot and bullet penetration studies, but I can tell you that with training, knowledge, and the acceptance of certain risks (everything has risk), that a lot of that can be minimized.
 @777 Caution: Teacher Thinking. This is good stuff, 777. It's time to apply rational thought to the situation. It's time for the bad guys to stop knowing where the guns aren't. Malls and theaters and schools should be safe for everyone EXCEPT nuts who want to hurt people.
 @777 I hope the School Resource Officers are better at protecting the kiddies than the four Lakewood policemen were at protecting themselves when Maurice Clemmons walked in on them in the Forza coffee shop in Parkland a few years ago.
@Eduardo Capistrano @777 One thing that I've learned is that no matter who you are; you can get killed. The Lakewood Officers weren't protecting themselves when they were attacked. They were ambushed. We're not superhuman or immortal. This isn't a movie or t.v. We do the best we can to protect our children and ourselves. A fully armed and armored elite warrior that trains 10 hours a day can easily be killed by an inexperienced 120 pound high school kid with a shank. In real-life combat, nothing is certain. The good guys do the best they can to have every unfair advantage possible through training and firepower. However, it seems the trend is that active shooters tend to stop or shoot themselves when they encounter a good guy with a gun. The Oregon mall shooter stopped when he saw a concealed carry permit holder. (again, the news media left this part out). http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2012/12/16/virtually-unreported-ccw-holder-likely-prevented-larger-clackamas-mall-d At Sandy Hook, Lanza shot himself when a spotted a police officer. Having an SRO is thousands times better than having none.
 @777 For every teacher who wants to be armed, we can find several who don't think guns in school would be a good idea. I have worked with several who think arming teachers would be asking for more shootings in school. I am inclined to agree with them.
@justmyopinion I think we're in agreement here. Some teachers are up for the task and some aren't. Some teachers already have training and most don't. The ones that don't have training and have no experience in firearms tend to disagree. Nothing wrong with that. I would imagine that their minds could quickly change when a bad guy bursts into a room shooting people.
 @777 "Arming teachers in this state is not the solution but should be a part of the solution. "
Â
This!!
 @777 I"m afraid the advice you are getting from my brother LEOs on many of the suggestions here is made by those who have not had to make entry into an active shooter situation in a school.or led a SWAT team. No teacher is going to take the time, if they remember at all, to don special caps, vests, etc. so we can tell good guns from bad guns, as an example. You freeze in high stress situation, the teachers will likewise freeze. Not a criticism, just a fact on how many of us are wired. As for your comments on video violence and the media, right on.
 @swatguy1 As others have pointed out, a number of teachers are military veterans. Good training will help as well. Also, a teacher freezing in panic is no different than a disarmed teacher--except that once the panic subsides an armed (and trained) teacher is able to take action.Â
Â
Good training will also limit friendly fire danger. Even without a firearm there is a significant risk to the victims when SWAT or regular LE enter that kind of situation. But is it better to eliminate the friendly fire risk only to exponentially elevate the risk of dying by the hands of the murderer? Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
this is what will happen if teachers get to bring guns to school.
Â
1. kids with guns at home will bring them to school to challenge their armed teachers
Â
2. teachers who try to seduce kids will now be armed
Â
3. parents will sue schools, because their kids feel threatened by an armed teacher
Â
4. psychopaths will escalate and use grenades and other bombs
Â
5. burned out teachers who'd already like to punch your brats will now be armed
Â
all you really need to do is watch the news or talk to someone you know who's been in Iraq or Afghanistan and ask them if having guns protects everyone from psychos who are hell bent on killing
Â
arm teachers and you turn our schools into war zones.now, if Camas has any people with brains who vote, you need to toss this moron out of office in the next election.
 @Anton 1. Never been shown to happen. 2 Pure paranoid speculation (also showing a very low regard for teachers). 3 easily dealt with via law limiting liability for good faith reasonable actions. 4 nothing stopping them from doing that now. 5 still nothing to keep them from doing that now, and apparently you missed that part about the psych eval (not perfect, but quite possibly better than you might expect).... And you think gun owners are paranoid.
This comment has been deleted
 @Eduardo Capistrano  @Anton Why do you keep bringing up that straw man again, and again, and again? Yes, we all KNOW that nothing is perfect, and that guns are not a magic talisman that protects you from bad people. We understand that. We have understood it for a LONG time. It's not news. So your point seems to be that because it's not perfect, we shouldn't do it, which is downright stupid. So, if that's NOT your point, what is?
 @Anton Wow. Imagine being seduced by one of those pretty blonde teachers armed with a gun. Wouldn't that be every teenage boy's dream come true?!!! ;-)))
@Anton please put your tin foil hat back on.
i, I am a High School Science teacher here in Washington State. I have often thought about what would happen if a unbalanced student were to physically threaten my other students or myself.
Â
In 1996, in the Scottish town of Dunblane a madman entered a school with four handguns and slaughtered 16 innocent children and one adult. Â Â Due to the fact that England has no Second Amendment, and a much different view on individual rights regarding personal protection, their government was able to effectively ban the private ownership of virtually all firearms by the end of the following year. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Â
All that did not stop another deranged man, Derrick Bird, from taking a .22 rifle--a bolt action single shot .22 rifle--and a double barreled shotgun, and using them to kill 12 people and injure another 11.            Â
Â
 I do not personally favor having a cop in every school. I do not believe that the cost outweighs the benefit. The odds of being in school shooting are almost nonexistent. Our national crime rate is down and our schools are safer than they have ever been.  However, I am not suggesting that another school shooting will never happen, to contrary I am certain it will, as evidenced by the two shootings in England. There they went to the extreme, banning virtually all fire arms throughout their country , the result? The madman found a different weapon Â
Â
           I believe, and I think history pretty clearly shows, that we cannot legislate Evil or stupidity away. We can only prepare for it. Specifically I would ask every school staff for volunteers to serve as Auxiliary Security force personnel for the school. Screen them, spend a little money on an initial training program, and train them in the use of deadly force. Consider having them concealed carry in the classroom, or creating a secure storage in the classroom or the office. Conduct drills quarterly, and have refresher training at least semi annually. This would not eliminate the risk, but it might give someone a chance to stop a shooting from reaching the level of Sandy Hook. What is being proposed by the Democrats would not have made any difference at all. None.  Â
Â
        I am perplexed by the reaction I get from some people. They seem to think me insane to suppose that a teacher could be trained to use deadly force. These are the same people who have been fighting for 18 year old young women to be trained as front line members in all branches of the military, but they simply cannot picture a retired military teacher, or any other teacher for that matter, with a concealed weapon in a classroom.
@Stan
I'm a firearms-trained teacher, and here are my responses.
Â
1. It won't happen, because the student won't know which teachers have a gun. Also, mentally ill students are more likely to challenge a teacher who is not armed. Armed or not, mentally ill students can attack anytime they want and however they want.
Â
2. You assume all teachers will be armed and all teachers who seduce kids will go out and buy a gun. Your imagination is running wild here. When the assault weapons ban expired, the anti-gun people started spreading made-up fears that all the crazies will go out and buy a gun and the nation would be in turmoil BECAUSE of the expiration. None of that happened. Allowing something doesn't equate to everyone doing it. I highly doubt that a crazy seducing teacher is going to go out and buy a gun for the purpose of seducing at school.
Â
3. Parents may or may not sue. Have you checked out Obama's kids' private school? 11 armed guards is the norm even without the president's kids there.
Â
4. You're right, psychopaths could do whatever they want. We can't control what they want to do. Columbine students had bombs; and that's without any armed teachers. (news media claims there was an armed guard there and nothing changed; not true. The armed guard was a police officer who was outside when it happened, exchanged gunfire and saved many lives. The liberal media likes to hide information like that).
Â
5. Burned out teachers usually just quit the job. Most teachers are not violent and we encounter bratty kids every year. It's a part of our job and as veteran teachers, we tend to let it roll of our backs. Give us a little credit, huh?
Â
If you haven't heard already, schools can be a war zone. We're just trying to protect our children and ourselves.
 @777  @Stan I'll tell you what is really going to happen if this is implemented.
Â
1. About once a year, a teacher in some school will "go postal" and shoot someone - more probably another teacher but possibly a student. (I personally knew of a teacher who went "postal" in class right in front of my one-time girlfriend, but who was thankfully not armed.)
Â
2. There will be a report of an armed intruder in some school - and shots fired. An armed teacher will step out of a classroom - gun in hand - to assess the situation, will be confronted by responding police, and will be shot to death on the spot.
Â
3. On average several times each year, a student will gain control of a teacher's firearm but (perhaps) not actually shoot anyone. Every couple of years, such a student will be shot by another teacher or by police.
 @777  @Stan ive had some crazy teachers who hide it well