Yes people kill people, but do we really need easy access

I watched the video, I guess I am caught up on ground breaking and what should be common sense?

 

If a) happens then you just really have to say oh well unless more than one person wants to go through training. In a general school given an intercom, I would guess you could navigate a building decently quick. It's a lot better than right now having to call on cops and wait for first responders to get there for sure.

 

I have been giving this some thought as well, and just tossing this out there for critique:

What if each school had a locker. In that locker was a weapon (shotgun being the best choice because of less chance of penetration damage through walls or the target). The principle, vice principle and perhaps school counselor have the combination to said locker. The locker is also networked to the local police department so that if it is opened, a signal is sent to the police department that it was opened and an officer is dispatched to the premises immediately. Once a month, the police come by with a code they have, open the locker without setting off alarms and inspect/clean/maintain the weapon.

Principle/Vice-Principle/Counselor each are required an hour of training per month during the school year, with a day training at the start of the year. Might they get killed trying to use it? Of course. But better than a lunatic running around with a weapon (sword, axe, hand gun, automatic weapon) killing his or her students with no chance of repercussion until the police show up.

EDIT: Man, by the time I typed this out, 6 posts on something like this Card threw out there. Getting slow in my old age.

 

There should be absolutely NO, zero NO, NONE requirement that anyone not in LEO move toward any danger.

 

I don't have a problem with trying it, but I don't see how it would make a difference most of the time. If the room being hit contains the teacher, they'd likely be shot before they even knew what was happening. If the teacher is on the opposite end of the school, it could be over before the teacher has a chance to evacuate their own students and make their way over.

 

There has absolutely been more of these the past 15 years than before that. Whoever said these nuts are seeing the TV coverage and thinking "I could do that too" hit it spot on IMO. My concern is limiting the carnage and the best way to do that. Obviously we need to monitor who has access to these things. Apparently this kid was pulled aside for psychological evaluation in HS, though no one thought he was violent. not sure how you determine who is nuts and isn't and do that without seriously infringing on people's rights. perhaps owning a firearm should be something akin to getting a pilots licence. make them pass multiple courses and such.

 

locker with a police alarm makes a ton of sense. I'd be in favor of that.

 

Yet the principle at the Newtown school did just that. Why? They love the kids. They are psuedo-parents. I know I could not and would not just huddle in my office if I knew I could do something. These are extreme circumstances. I am not asking a teacher to go into a gang infested project to deliver homework assignments.

Can you put a full-time police officer in every school?

 

From the NYPD study on active shooters

"In 2011, the NYPD published Active Shooter: Recommendations and Analysis for Risk Mitigation. In this report, the
NYPD studied 281 active shooter attacks that occurred between 1966 and 2010. This analysis showed thatolice Department
City of New York
2
If You See Something, Say Something – 1-888-NYC-SAFE (1-888-692-7233)
Active shooters are overwhelmingly male; 96% of attacks were carried out by men.
The vast majority of active shooters act alone; 98% of attacks were carried out by a single perpetrator.
The median age of active shooters is 35. However, the vast majority of active shooter attacks that occur at
schools were perpetrated by 15 to 19 year-olds.
The median number of deaths in active shooter attacks is two, as is the median number of wounded. However,
some of the highest casualty attacks occurred on school campuses.
29% of active shooter attacks occurred at schools.
36% of active shooter attacks involved more than one weapon. In several cases, attackers used firearms that
they had stolen from relatives or friends. This pattern was most apparent in school-related shootings.
40% of active shooter attacks end with suicide or attempted suicide by the perpetrator. "

 

Right, they did it on their own terms. You put a firearm in their office and they fail to stop the violence, and they are no longer heroes. They are failures at best, and villains at worst. Obviously the caveat to this is if they die trying to engage the suspect. Then still hero.

 

I appreciate your feed back. It was just an idea I had. And I can honestly see no parts where the defender (principle in this case) could possibly come out as the villain. Unless they went batshit crazy and opened the locker themselves without warrant. But then they could just bring in firearms of their own, in that case.

And of course, opening the safe without cause would be a fire-able offense at best, an arrestable one at worst.

 

This is a horrific horrific event. I have only been able to read one story about it and I had a deep revulsion set in... to kill the most innocent in our society is without a doubt pure evil.

However, the talk of gun control and blanketing everyone with that gun control is stating that because someone else caused harm or someone else might cause harm, then I'm going to be held presumptively responsible for that potential harm by restricting my rights by treating ME as as if I already had caused said harm.

And when you go down that rabbit hole, there is no end to it – because it’s open-ended. If “someone” might do something then certainly any of us could be that someone and a free society cannot withstand this type of thinking.

These words are not my own, yet I think illustrate the point.

 

This number surprises me. Thought it'd be higher.

 

I think Float means that they would be considered not heroes if they just evacuated the students and left with them like normal.

 

If he froze up, in fear, and sat in the office, or stayed in the office trying to protect his staff... he would absolutely become the villain, with everyone in the world saying what they would have done in that instance, having never been in such a situation, and how much of a coward he was that he didn't take on the threat head on.

 

I understand. And a cop guarding the school, with all the training in the world, they would never freeze up or panic under fire until being in said situation? And if they did, would they also not become villains? Or is OK for the cop to be a villain but not the principle who is the de-facto captain of the School Ship?

EDIT: Just to restate, this is just an idea floating in my head, trying to come to grips with what happened and my own ideas (or previous ideas, all is in flux) of gun ownership. More a thought experiment than anything.

 

A law enforcement officer that freezes up has not done his actual, paid to do, job. If he fails, and is vilified, then at least it is somewhat more deserved.

A response team who has an officer freeze would probably never even get reported. A lot of school guards rotate. Not everyone knows exactly who it is.

Everyone knows who the principal is, and all eyes will be on him or her. And it is not their responsibility, and nor should it, to respond to a deadly situation unless they so feel the need to do so. And it would be terrible if we put such a requirement on our school administrators.

If they want to be armed, then so be it, arm them. But you cannot require that they respond to an active shooter. After all, even law enforcement doesn't send only one individual to intercept.

 

I would be interested to see a study on the surviving teachers after such a shooting, and if they have a lot of survivor's guilt, and if they have a lot of remorse in the fact there was not more they could do. Of course, we can not know how we will react to such a situation. I am not sitting here with a lot of testostorone flowing going "Gimme my SAW, I'll kill the mother ****er!". I would like to think that I would react, however, especially in a school full of children that are under my protection.

I understand your argument. And it is a good one and gives room for thought on the subject.

 

I don't think a security guy or officer at a school by themselves should throw their lives away, if the situation is not tactically sound (multiple shooters, holed up in a classroom). Just throwing that in there, I don't think you guys were quite speaking of something so specific. Some folks might call them a coward, but if they can't reasonably improve the situation they should wait for more help.

 

Do teachers in the rooms that get hit often survive? I think most get shot right off the bat.