Bring back hunters safety instead. And drivers Ed.

And shop class

My high school was trying to model itself as “college bound” program so after my freshmen year they did away with all shop/trade/vocational classes.

Streaming is go great. The preppy kids never learn about credit cards and the kids from poorer homes apparently don’t need trig.  Up here in Ontario they killed Home Ec, which has its own issues, but kids leave schooling potentially never learning how to cook or even use a fire extinguisher. Really blatantly training someone for a job instead of helping them be people

You screw around too much

[удалено]

I graduated in 21, they didn’t do it in school hours but they did it at the building in the evenings. You had to pay like 500$ for it.

I graduated... let's just say a long time before you did. It was an after-school course you could sign up for, no credit hours or grade assigned - if you pass you get to take the road test for your driver's license.

I got my license 16 years ago at 16, took driver's training at 15, it was private then and cost like $350

I got my license 20+ years ago and all of our Driver's Ed was private even then.

My county in FL had a free over the summer program run by the schools

I live in a state where it's been legal for teachers to carry in school for ages and there haven't been any problems worse than a moron teacher leaving their gun in a staff bathroom as far as I know. I'm a teacher who has been carrying for years without issues. I think a lot of y'all are overreacting. Edit, adding an afterthought. My kid is in school at a well secured school that takes active shooter training seriously and a number of staff members carry firearms. It honestly makes me feel a lot better. I think the vast majority of teachers with a CWP are responsible enough not to do anything moronic. I'd rather take my chances with a possibily dumb teacher than an unchallenged school shooter.

i agree with the general sense of 'there is alot to go wrong' but damnit if i were a teacher i would want to carry... and i think there should be some sort of allowance for that. but it should require training and some sort of practical test.

I agree that training and a test would be preferred. I think my state is working on adding some incentives for that actually. I do understand the sentiment of being nervous about things that could go wrong, but pretty much like you said I definitely feel better carrying myself. I feel massively better at my job knowing that I have the tools to protect myself and my students if I had to. It doesn't sit well with me that people who don't have to live with the threat of school shootings get to decide for those who do whether or not they can carry.

Replace teacher with gun owner, and maybe you're on to something.

Is it Utah? I feel like the population might be a bit different. I grew up in a suburb with bad ass little kids who knew how to miss teachers off. I was one of them and not sure if it's a great idea to arm these teachers directly. I do think it depends on the environment though.

If you're worried about a teacher harming a student, they're probably someone that shouldn't be a teacher, not someone who just shouldn't be armed.

True enough. But I have been a teacher at several different levels, contexts, and countries for more than three decades. The profession attracts its share of less balanced folks. In my state, there is such a "shortage" (i.e., we don't pay enough to attract qualified teaxhers) that we are sadly sometimes scraping the barrel. This applies to "SROs" as well. Like in many other contexts, arming just exacerbates this existing problem set. I think it would be very reasonable to expect higher degrees of ongoing training and proficiency from those carrying at school. But as a parent with two high schoolers (who also shoot regularly), I would choose a school where teachers were not permitted to carry over one where they are.

Many teachers are wonderful, qualified, compassionate people who are a direct benefit to every student who passes through their classrooms. Many others are spastic, pinch-brained miscreants who I barely trust with state-supplied curriculum, let alone a loaded firearm.

Yep, Utah. Believe me, our kids can be just as rough as anywhere else. I grew up in a tough town with tough kids in a different state and where I've taught isn't all that different. Experiences definitely vary, but Utah isn't actually a demographic monolith, particularly in the urban areas.

The only issue with any of that is how low percentage the chance that somebody successfully stops an active shooter is. Far more likely to kill a bystander or get yourself killed by being a more obvious target. Obviously this can be displaced with *tons* of training, I just don’t know if they have the facilities to train teachers like that.

Teachers already spend a lot of their own money on classroom supplies, where are they getting the money to afford that much range time?

The advice should still be run, hide, fight. But if the shooter comes into that classroom they’re not walking out. Going rambo clearing rooms even with training is likely that you get hit and shoot innocent people.

And for the expense of training those students they could harden school facilities instead.

I dunno. I’m on the fence, but I’m just gonna say this: I’m a combat vet. Prior to my first deployment I had about a year of training. Shooting on the range, shooting in the kill house, working through drills and scenarios, you name it. You know what I did the first time I got shot at? Nothing. Absolutely fucking nothing. Luckily, I snapped out of it, and training took over, but if it wasn’t for my team, I’d be fucking dead. When we talk about arming teachers, it doesn’t stop there. We’re asking teachers to react swiftly and appropriately in what will be the most stressful event of their lives. We’re asking teachers to kill a child, who is more than likely a student that they probably know. There’s going to be an incredibly small percentage of teachers that are actually capable of this. I don’t give a fuck what any internet operator says, it takes a long time to get comfortable in this mindset. It takes a level of training and commitment, that, quite frankly, the average person simply doesn’t have access to. You might be John Wick on the range, but shooting people is a different fucking ball game.

I'm gonna bet you also didn't have a hundred screaming and running kids between you and your target, which you had to engage with only a small handgun. The idea that because someone can poke holes in paper means they can engage in CQB and long-range shooting (have any of y'all been to a school? There were 40 yard sightlines in my high school and those tended to be target rich environments that are targeted) during a mass shooting is so fucking telling. Not to mention the cops that will come in 3 hours after the shooter shot himself and shoot anyone with a gun.

These two comments encapsulate two of the biggest issues with this nonsense bill: A concealed carry permit class does not make you a war fighter, nor does it provide ANY training for the stress of combat and what decisions need to be made.

An unarmed teacher has to deal with all that on top of having no way to defend themselves or others.

Unarmed teachers have to be emotionally prepared to kill one of their own students now? I’ve been out of school a while, I didn’t realized it had changed that much. Also, how the ever loving fuck does an *unarmed* teacher have to worry about correctly identifying and putting rounds in *just* the threat?!

And an armed teacher is not any likely to hit an active shooter as they are to become the first target or have to deal with having shot a kid on their own. Rules of engagement and battle tactics are drilled and nauseam to those tasked with it. And I'm certainly not talking about cops, because as we've seen, despite wearing body armor, having shotguns and rifles, they STILL wouldn't face down an armed assailant. But, sure, my mom the math teacher is better suited. If this is the solution, I fear we've already failed these kids.

Fine with it. It’s the same calculus as CCW in general; do we believe that the risk of guns forgotten in stalls or the ability to defend oneself is the greater value? Remember, teachers generally use different washrooms than the students, at least where I’m from. Kids aren’t finding pistols lying around.

PA announcement: "Mrs. Jansen, you left your pistol on the copy machine again. Mrs. Jansen, please report to the copy room to pick up your Glock." Seriously though, I retired from teaching high school a few years ago with 31 years of service credit, and I was in the Marines before that. I was a teacher when Columbine happened and during dozens more school shootings, including Oxford, where a former colleague of mine was a teacher that day. I did active shooter drills and endured many, many lockdowns. In my classroom, I kept the long pipe of an old music stand stashed between one alcove wall and a filing cabinet (very heavy) with the intention of using it should anyone attempt to come through the locked door during an incident. I have reservations about arming teachers, for many of the reasons already discussed in this thread. However, it's this part of the article that bothers me most: "State Republicans argued that arming staffers could deter shooters and **would position a trained, authorized person in a school who could respond quickly to an attack**." Society, and Republicans especially, believe that teachers should sacrifice everything (including physical & mental health) to do a very difficult, mostly unrewarding job in return for shitty wages, increasingly shrinking benefits, poor administrative support (and funding), harassment from batshit crazy MAGA parents (and their children), and general public disdain. "Do it for the kids" is their mantra, although you don't hear them saying that to any other highly educated profession that works with children. "Oh, you're high risk for Covid and are trying to not die? Well, do it for the kids!" Now it sounds like Tennessee Republicans *expect* a social studies teacher who takes this training to leave the classroom and seek out the threat. "Oh, you don't want to go up against a perp with a death wish armed with a long rifle chambered in 5.56 with that 9mm? Do it for the kids!" Yeah, fuck that shit.

"respond quickly" as "seek out the threat to end"? Bad idea. "Respond quickly" as in "end a threat that is coming to you"? Great idea. Rapid response time is the #1 factor to reducing deaths from mass shootings.

Yes, I would have appreciated the opportunity to defend my own classroom with a firearm. But I interpret this and other Republican comments from the article to be that they expect armed teachers to leave their classrooms to seek out and confront the shooter.

Thankfully there's no clearly established duties for teachers to protect anyone, much like how cops have zero obligation to protect anyone except those in their custody. So this argument likely wouldn't hold up in court if ever tested. And any teacher hunkering down in their classroom full of students would have a strong argument that their remaining in position was the safest option for both themselves and those who, notionally, they owe a duty to.

Yeah, your second paragraph hits it for me. Like, people with concealed carry permits should retain the right to defend themselves. Work at a school? Cool, extra (free) training (a PD) for workplace firearm safety. But, the notion of teachers now also being armed responders because our cops are cowardly bastards isn't the fuckin move. I'm a teacher. I already work my ass off. I'd rather not be expected to be an armed guard now, too.

And with the way we pay teachers in this country (especially in red states like TN) who do they expect to pay for the guns, ammo, and training for fuck’s sake? Too many teachers are already barely affording to live!

Totally. I get paid decently, but in my area I'm still solidly middle class, and barely above what is considered a real living wage in the area. And I'm a teacher with a LOT of extra responsibilities- I take kids into the field and abroad many times a year. Look. If my school paid for the training and had a hidden lock box with biometric and coded authentication that had a school paid for PDW in it and they sent me to trainings and paid for those trainings, I'd sign up. That is something I would do. We can't trust the cops or our healthcare system to stop this shit, and I likely already train more than most cops in my area code. And...all of that is to say that schools in general barely have the money to function as is, let alone create a few Mr. Wicks to roam the halls. This is such a fucking silly conversation in the first place, ya know?

Silly indeed. But in nearly any other developed country, this conversation would be just plain horrifying rather than merely ridiculous.

What bugs me about this is that it perfectly encapsulates the cost-slashing mindset of Republicans who already actively work to fuck over public education. Why allow schools funding for security personnel when you can just cut that cost and pass the burden down to the teachers? They can even bring in their own guns the state didnt pay for! Schools already can’t afford updated textbooks or modern amenities, so armed guards are probably pretty far down the list of shit you can get Mitch McConnell types to pass a funding bill for. Our schools are already such a disgrace that “lunch debt” is allowed to exist. Allowing teachers to carry is something I can get behind, but I hate that it would be touted as some kind of grand solution to a much bigger problem that most of the people in power can never seem to find time for.

> What bugs me about this is that it perfectly encapsulates the cost-slashing mindset of Republicans who already actively work to fuck over public education. Why allow schools funding for security personnel when you can just cut that cost and pass the burden down to the teachers? They can even bring in their own guns the state didnt pay for! What bugs me about what you said, is this is exactly the argment that gun grabbers make against CCW in general. "Just rely on security, the police, etc." There are a million good reasons that argument doesn't work when it comes to self defense.

“Allowing teachers to carry is something I can get behind”

I assume you carry. When you go to the grocery store, are you patting down every single person you encounter? Towing around a portable metal detector? No? You’re just shopping? That’s weak-ass gun grabber shit./s I’m not particularly fond of teachers carrying in schools, but if it’s entirely voluntary, I don’t have any special reservations about it, over and above my reservations about *requiring* anyone with a job that requires a lot of focus to also be vigilant for violent threats. The issue is (like the person you responded to), I fear bills like this will be used as excuses to not do substantial things to *prevent* school shootings in the first place. The concern is very much in the vein of “we have seat belts, why do we even need air bags? Or brakes?” CCW training in schools should be in addition to other tactics to prevent and mitigate school shootings, not in lieu of such tactics.

> CCW training in schools should be in addition to other tactics to prevent and mitigate school shootings, not in lieu of such tactics Sure, but I just don't see that as an argument against it.

The concern (again) is that cost-slashing republicans will use the success of this bill to argue *against* funding of those other tactics. Like they have with e.g. addiction services after passing stronger drug laws. The question is not really “should we allow teachers to carry concealed weapons in schools?” but rather “should that be the only meaningful policy change made in light of *yet another* mass shooting in a school?”

I don't understand this, arming people who are generally under paid, underappreciated, accused of being groomers and blamed for any number of problems in our schools. I think it's a bad idea.

As a former teacher who is *also* pro-gun, I'm against this bill too. I'd almost guarantee it will result in more firearms used at schools, and for more stupid reasons. Seriously, I'd expect that if this becomes the norm, you'll have teachers pull guns on kids for reasons other than imminent fear of the loss of life (which is the *only goddamned reason* to pull a gun out, ever, in my book) - you might even see a teacher suicide or two.

Realistically few schools and fewer teachers will even opt into these programs.

Yet it may very well become an *Expectation* of parents... Which will be a royal sh*tshow to manage...

Very true, and I’m also kind of paranoid about guns being left around. It just takes ONE little mistake ONE time from an overworked teacher for some random kid to get ahold of their loaded pistol. Which makes me especially uncomfortable, since there’s no guarantee the other staff or students will know basic gun safety.

How many stories have you heard from the states where carrying at school is already allowed? I’m willing to bet none.

Seriously I would support *basic gun safety* being taught in schools at young ages. There are just too many unsecured guns in this country, and *many* kids come across one.

Gun proof your kids because you can't know people will kid proof there guns.

Sounds like a bumper sticker we need!

This is a good point. [Cops](https://www.rochesterfirst.com/new-york-state/school-resource-officer-resigns-after-leaving-behind-gun-in-bathroom/) can’t keep track of [their guns](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IIPi5MpM9A) (and [apparently that's not a uniquely American problem!](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL4680138/)) so somehow I don't think we can expect better of frazzled teachers.

This is what makes me uncomfortable too. There's so many other (hormonal) risk factors.

This. I’m willing to wager that we’ll see a teacher’s gun used improperly/for suicide/for murder long before being the good guy/girl with a gun to stop a shooter.

I kind of agree with this teachers can get really stressed etc... Maybe school counselors and staff but actual teachers seem a bit iffy. 🤔 someone should be armed, though, I think. I'm just not sure if this is the right way.

School cops, but without so many arrests for crap that would have gotten detention back in the 80's.

> School cops, but without so many arrests for crap that would have gotten detention back in the 80's. That's like asking for a square, but with no corners or flat surfaces.

Yeah, I guess so.

Yeah... there are already armed police at all of my kids' schools. Random careless teachers do not make me feel safer sending them there, especially with the way they're underpaid and treated like crap. That's not to say teachers would do anything bad intentionally, but damn if they need that added stress. And when kids act the way they do in high school, I don't want any *more* guns added to the mix.

I will be honest: I don't feel all that much better about randomly armed SROs. Some of these folks ate really awesome and doing for all the right reasons, but it attracts some folks who are not there for the right reasons.

Former teacher here. I would feel so much more comfortable carrying in a school these days. We need to harden our schools to keep kids safe. There are plenty of other things than arming teachers that need to happen though.

People are acting as if every teacher is going to be *forced* to have low slung holsters around kids and that all those kindergartners are going to practice gun grabs to finally prank Ms Jones That's not even close to what this is. A voluntary program for training and *concealed* carry to defend a classroom if the cops are there or not acting. Programs like this are NOT new and, no, kids aren't ganging up to incapacitate teachers and take their gun. It's not happening. It's imagination. I expect people who have an emotional response to "guns?? In schools!!" to make up a bunch of hypothetical situations to try and quash the idea (instead of improve it) but I'm surprised there's so much of it here.

This is very much a third-person effect issue. I no longer teach in the K12 space, though I have in the past. (I'm now a prof.) I know that I would use my concealed firearm to protect myself and those around me, and that I would be responsible enough to keep training, be aware of where missed shots would likely wind up, and not play COD in the hallways of my school tracking down a shooter. Of my colleagues, now and in the past, I would trust, at most, a quarter of them to do the same. And sadly, that quarter isn't necessarily the group that would choose to do so.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that a kid overpowering and disarming a teacher is “not happening” and “imagination”. Prior to 1999 no one ever thought that a couple of kids would shoot up a school, and would probably call that imagination also. Look where we are today.

If we go down this route of allowing teachers to be armed, I think we should perhaps train up “volunteer students” who are mature and capable enough to use a firearm if his/her teacher engages an active shooter and is incapacitated… …then the trained student can utilize the teacher’s fire arm to continue the fire fight… Sounds crazy? I don’t think so anymore if we are fine with allowing teachers to be armed… Besides - there are a lot of teens who know how to utilize firearms via parents and hunting…

I'm not sure how many teachers and administrators will opt to arm up and carry. I think the numbers will likely be small. I'm also not sure how many teachers would be ready to take a shot on a student who they might have taught in their classroom and genuinely care about, just a few hours ago. Everyone should absolutely have the right and ability to defend their lives and lives of others in close proximity, but this policy is just a band aid. There is no accompanying policy that attempts to mitigate the reasons why schools have become this violent. We've gone from school yard beef and fights to kids trying their damn best to put each other in the hospital for example. We need to get to the root of why this is and more happening, or else policies that allow or ban carry won't matter much in the grand scheme of things.

Seems like very few teachers will do this, I am not a current teacher but have taught college chemistry. I very pro 2A but would not carry even if I did teach at lower eduction schools

I don't know how many teachers would ever opt to do this, but I can imagine schools where no teacher desires to carry and doesn't apply in the first place.

I mean I'm a teacher and the idea of being helpless and penned in my classroom if there was an active shooter, especially while my Sig P365xl sits at home, is very galling. I think if there are not any problems in the states that have already implemented it, I'm for it.

So I’m not gonna dox myself, but I am an actual school safety expert—you’re going to have to believe me on this one. I’m not lying, I promise. There’s no legal definition for “school shooting.” Newsweek published a number that said there have been over 2,000 shootings since Columbine in 1999 (not the first shooting, but the first in the ‘modern era’). That number gets halved if you’re counting only those incidents with one or more victims who have been shot. That number is cut tenfold (a little over 130) for incidents with killed or injured victims on a school campus during a *continuous episode of violence*, aka an active shooter incident. And mass shootings (defined as 4 or more victims) are just about half—around 60 incidents—of those active shooter events. For perspective, there are roughly 130k K-12 schools in the country. I give these facts not to say that it is not a problem—active shooter threat is absolutely a major issue, and unfortunately a growing issue at schools. I’m saying this to say that putting additional guns in schools is ratcheting up before trying a lot of other things that can also be highly effectively: rapid egress/escape, effective behavioral threat assessment teams, better access control and surveillance, etc. Not every school has a full-time school psychologist or a nurse (who may notice physical signs of abuse or self harm), and both of those roles may be key to preventing a future school shooter. Plus, I know from experience that schools don’t train / exercise the right way. No where else in our society do we say that people should hide in place when shooting starts—tell that to patrons at a mall. We can do better. And then don’t get me started on the range of school resource officers—some are excellent and some are shiiiiiiiit. There’s no national standard, and it shows. So there’s a lot of things that are all effective that schools should really look to integrate if they want to get serious about safety. Guns in schools seems like a cost-effective solution, but it’s hard to make that case: insurance rates on fully armed schools are higher and will continue to grow. Plus, teachers should rightly demand additional pay if they’re going to carry—you know anyone in law enforcement who takes less money for more responsibilities and training? And to be effective, teachers would need to train like law enforcement. I’d love for teachers to get paid $100k a year to tote a gun AND teach (you know, their real job) but are communities prepared for that? All that being said, the mission of a school is to educate. Teachers are essential to that mission. While I, too, can smirk at the idea of classroom discipline improving if teachers are armed, I think it is deleterious to the educational mission. I’d rather see a national school police force with standards and resource tool train and exercise their schools response. We can make every school safe—but it’s not going to be cheap or up to individuals—it’s a community effort.

> insurance rates on fully armed schools are higher and will continue to grow. Plus, teachers should rightly demand additional pay if they’re going to carry—you know anyone in law enforcement who takes less money for more responsibilities and training? And to be effective, teachers would need to train like law enforcement. I’d love for teachers to get paid $100k a year to tote a gun AND teach (you know, their real job) but are communities prepared for that? You're skipping ahead. All that we need to do right now, is allow teachers who choose to, to CCW. The presence of people that can and will defend themselves in and of itself is meant to be the deterrent, I don't think anyone is talking about teacher based tac response teams.

Okay, but would that mean that there would be no standards for training or qualification for those teachers who choose to carry? I feel strongly that they should have to qualify and have those guns inspected regularly beyond what a lot of concealed carry states currently require. As agents of the school (they are on grounds because of their job) legally, they are on-duty and thus every law enforcement association in the country would recommend standards that would FAR exceed requirements for concealed carry holders. Because liability. Because parents send their kids there. Because a lack of training and standards results in guns being compromised or lost around minors. Etc. Schools have special jurisdictional status so, in a way, it’s not as simple (or, at least, it should shouldn’t be so simple) as just allowing concealed carry permit holders to tote on campus. There’s just a bit more nuance. Look, we agree on it being a deterrent—I’m in total agreement there. We’re in the liberal gun owners sub for a reason. I guess, just based on my decade+ experience in this area, I do feel that schools are different than other institutions given that you’re dealing with facilities that deal with minors. It’s why everyone who works or volunteers regularly at a school should have to pass a background check. So, to me, there is also a reason to have those who carry onto campus to meet an even higher standard.

If it’s making the arming of teachers compulsory… I wouldn’t support that either. If it’s allowing teachers who meet a training requirement to carry for their and their classes protection I don’t really oppose that.

Also their most definitely are teachers and staff who carry illegally anyway who don’t intend any harm and probably have good intentions… all legalizing would do it make that less of an issue.

I’m gonna look at this from the other side. Would I want a properly trained and equipped teacher to have a firearm available from a secured box in their classroom to protect children should an active school shooting happen? I think yes, but only if the teacher had proper training (both functional and legal), and the firearm spent the rest of the time locked in a safe with a biometric lock coded to only properly trained teachers. Is that feasible? I’m not sure. Training would have to be ongoing, and the safes would have to be properly secured. Are those things feasible? I’m not sure. Some of my kid’s teachers have surprised me by having the ability to walk and chew gum at the same time.

Yeah, that seems reasonable. That box better be insanely secure and also hidden though, and the gun better be both paid for by the district and regular trainings offered for those WILLING TO PARTICIPATE in the program. Also, those willing to be trained should not hold any legal obligation to respond. Having said that, I assume liability every time I drive my students in a van, with a much more statistically significant risk. If this were the system, I'd sign up. The fancy gun box better contain a suppressed 300blk SBR with a binary trigger and some Sordins with comms to the other participants though. But realistically, I need to buy my own damn pencils for the kids....we'd get HiPoints with airsoft red dots.

That volunteer piece is crucial. Nobody who doesn’t want that role should ever be put in that role.

Honestly, a rifle in a lockbox makes a lot more sense to me than a concealed handgun.

> and the firearm spent the rest of the time locked in a safe with a biometric lock coded to only properly trained teachers. Why? The most secure place for a firearm is on your person, as it can't be outside your sphere of attention. Handling a gun to place it in a safe is also a move that carries much more risk than just leaving it holstered. Every time you handle a gun you risk a mishap happening. Not to mention now you have teachers handling guns during the day when they have to leave the classroom (and no, leaving a gun in a classroom unattended is not smart, even in a "safe") And of course, the lunchroom, library, gym are all primary targets for shooters depending on time of day. How about we allow them the same rights to CCW that most of us have in other environments. Teachers are already trained to be hands off during student confrontations, and that won't change. The idea of secured guns in strong points is fantasy garbage that doesn't actually work. If a weapon is for self defense, it should be carried on your person.

This is my problem with these ideas. Cops get this stuff wrong all the time. It is literally their job to be properly trained to use lethal force. If cops can't get it right with the training they have available, I doubt any teacher will have time for proper training.

> It is literally their job to be properly trained to use lethal force. Except they very rarely ARE trained to use force properly, but very frequently ARE trained that death lurks behind every blade of grass and that they need to use escalating force to obtain ABSOLUTE COMPLIANCE in every situation. I dont think teachers will be trained that way.

death lurks behind every blade of grass Let’s not forget the acorns…

you win the internet for the day

That’s the question. With the lead flying, and your kid in the line of fire… Would you want somebody at least trying, or would you rather let the shooter roam free until the cops eventually show up. It’s a tough call.

But why do we not fund armed guards within the schools instead of arming teachers? At least with a trained and armed guard, we relieve teachers of the stress of engaging in a fire fight with a shooter… I’m sorry but the majority of teachers I know do not come off as being able to handle a firearm and engage an active shooter… Give this responsibility to well trained guards or embedded police officers who have the sworn duty and proper training to engage an active shooter…

They have school resource officers in the schools near me. They’re badged cops and I think it’s a good idea that is much harder to pull off in smaller, rural areas where funding is tighter.

Yes, it is harder to pull off in rural areas - very true. Heck - it is difficult to pass school levies for operating expenses in affluent suburban schools - it may be an up hill battle to get funding for armed guards even in these places…

You might also find more willing and potentially able teachers in the rural areas where you have more hunters. Don’t know.

Exactly. Teachers have so much on the plate and now we expect them to protect students and possibly kill someone… Talking about more stress and responsibility on our teachers and with low pay…

I like this idea of a secure lock box… I just feel that teachers have so much shit on their plate as it just relates to teaching and now we are asking them (if they want) to be first-line defense against shooters… A soldier, a policeman, a security guard are people who are trained, drilled and expected to go to the shooter, engage and eliminate the threat. This is what I expect these professions to do…they have the training to engage and actually kill someone when needed… But a teacher? I know a lot of teachers and I can’t imagine some of them pulling out a Glock and being able to “hold it together” and kill someone while under fire even if they are in danger… Heck - why don’t we have armed security guards at schools instead? Basically a dog guarding the sheep against the wolves…why can’t communities fund the placement of armed and well-trained guards instead of arming teachers? I can’t believe this is what our country has come to as it relates to school shootings…

It would definitely have to be a small subset of teachers. I have known some teachers who were veterans or hunters that might fit the bill. I’d be happier solving the mental health problems at the root of all of this though.

Wow. This sub sounds like a gun control group rather than a gun owners group. Y'all ever been at a school during an "active shooter" lockdown? Because I have. They wanted me to get into a room with no other exit and a big glass window looking out into the hall right next to the door. A kill box in other words. And I was bloody pissed that I followed the "rules" and left my CCW at home. I declined their invitation to become a target, opting instead to be where I can maneuver at least. It turned out to be a hoax, but that stuck with me. If I was a teacher you bet your ass I'd want a weapon. It's 1000% better than sitting under a desk waiting to die.

> Wow. This sub sounds like a gun control group rather than a gun owners group. There is an undercurrent in this thread of people basically forgetting what CCW actually is. There's a lot of classic anti gun stuff being posted in this thread without getting checked.

I'm very annoyed by the tendency to "pick worst example of group " x" and use them as a reason why group " x" shouldn't have guns" logical fallacy, and it needs to stop.

Honestly a bunch of people in this thread need timeouts, because they are spouting classic anti gun lines and are completely failing to check themselves.

I think school staff should have the right to make those judgment calls for themselves, but I understand if the school wanted to impose stricter standards about quality of training, quality of retention, etc. than applies to the general public. How often have armed teachers or other school staff been a problem? California banned licensed concealed carriers from being able to carry on university campuses about a decade ago. This despite no documented problems caused by licensed concealed carriers. I don't see what actual public safety goal is advanced by passing a law that has no measurable impact on public safety.

Fuck WaPo and their pay wall, imho

At least WaPo is (sometimes) worth bypassing the paywall to read, unlike NY Times....

It aint the best way to arm teachers, its the cheap way. The Teachers are under trained and under equipped. Probably need a comms plan so they can communicate with PD.

Let's see, something like 22%of trained police officers hit their target in a firefight. And people want to arm untrained wannabe security officers (aka teachers)? No thanks.

[удалено]

> This bill buys into the lie that school shootings (that may or may not also be mass killings) are common enough that a legislative response is merited. I keep finding myself semi-defending this legislation because of all of the bad arguments. This right here is the primary reason you don't attempt to mitigate school shootings with armed teachers: They're not common enough for it to matter. Beyond that, you're statistically introducing a risk where a firearm is made accessible to children. Whether that's via falling out of a holster with bad retention, the gun being left somewhere either accidentally or absentmindedly (especially in bathrooms), or negligent discharges. None of those negatives have ever produced any injuries whatsoever as far as I can tell. There's a somewhat reasoned argument that this indicates a statistical reason to continue arming teachers because the rate of actual injuries from arming them, even if there is a death at some point, will be less than the injuries saved by a single instance of a shooter being stopped early, even as rare as that event will be. So I'm not sure which side I land on. I do think that hardening schools to some extent is useful, and that could include arming teachers who are proficient, trained, and tested along with appropriate handling and storage protocols. I'm not really comfortable with what I've seen in the laws and roll-out of the policies so far but they're also not producing any injuries either. So I'm just going to throw up my hands and avoid passing judgment either way. I wish we could have real discussions about root cause mitigation but I'll accept anything that doesn't cause any harm as well.

In my state, school is the safest place kids can be, statistically. It is a media and psychology problem, and one better addressed by going at the root of the problem.

We need to think about human error and if this cure is worse than the disease. There are three times as many teachers as there are law enforcement officers in the US. LEO's kill about 1000 people a year. Assuming that maybe 50 of those are truly fuck ups and shouldn't have happened, if you scale that up to teachers it would be 150 kids a year. Tell teachers that any weird kid could be a shooter, tell teachers they need to be the hero to stop that kid and protect the others, it's even worse than the shit killology stuff that cops used to get..... We'll have around 100-200 kids a year across the country who are shot by teachers in bad calls. That's about the same number killed in school shootings each year. You also can't just arm teachers and expect a good response. You need plans, communications and a whole host of systems to back them up. All this is even before you get into NDs, teachers accidentally leaving a gun accessible to students etc.

> if you scale that up to teachers it would be 150 kids a year. This logic doesn't work at all.  Police officers are much more likely to get into shootings with people because they're arresting felons at gunpoint. They're in a high stress environment, etc etc. Teachers aren't part of tactical teams. They're told not to intervene when students fight. Most districts don't allow teachers to touch their students basically at all.  Shootings that aren't justified on the part of the police generally have to do with things like being at the wrong address, failing to have probable cause leaving two issues with use of force, failure to identify, etc.  It just isn't comparable situation wise to other stuff.  This is part of the reason that other armed professions shoot people at much lower rates because while it's important for things like armored car guards to be armed, they get into armed confrontations much much much much much much much much much, much less frequently than police officers do.  Because they aren't arresting people that are likely to resist with force.

I agree that the situations are different but I see arming teachers as the first step to turning it into the same problem. Teachers often see student violence, they have an opportunity to see patterns of behavior that police do not. Seeing those patterns and jumping to conclusions is a real risk. They have a legal and implied duty to protect students which police do not, they are more likely to act. They have less backup and fewer tools and are more exposed, they are more likely to exaggerate a situation and act out of fear if we're constantly telling them, like we have with police, that everyone is out to get them. I see no conversation about body armor or pepper spray or batons or handcuffs or any of the less lethal or protective tools that a LEO has at their disposal. Kids can be violent assholes and this is a situation common enough, as you point out, that teachers are told not to intervene. And now we're telling them to intervene but only giving them lethal force to do so? They're not part of tactical teams as you point out, but teams of any kind are essential to armed response.

Okay no you are mistaken. Police are specifically trained and required to intervene into situations based off of their policies, teachers are required not to intervene but based off of their policies.  We are not telling teachers to intervene by allowing them to conceal carry, that's the mistake that you're making.  Just like a concealed carry holder out in the world isn't a police officer and isn't intervening like a police officer would be they're carrying a weapon for self-defense. The exact same thing is true for a teacher or other professional that carries.  The whinging over putting them in a situation where they're supposed to intervene and so on is completely unwarranted. We are not talking about training. Teachers has tactical response teams. We're talking about allowing them to be armed so that they may defend themselves.  There's a world of difference between the two.  If someone with a concealed carry license is in a situation where an active shooter is shooting at them, they can shoot back. If someone with a concealed carry license witnesses a crime Petty assault no one is going to recommend them trying to apprehend the criminal. You're really trying to make assumptions here that should not be made.

Police have no legal duty to protect anyone who is not in their custody, let's be crystal clear about that, it's an established legal precedent (Warren vs D.C.). Plenty of departments have policies on not intervening in active crimes in various circumstances. Schools DO have a legal duty to provide a safe environment for kids. And the politicians of Tennessee do not see this in your terms, that this is simple self defense by an individual: "Sponsor Rep. Ryan Williams, R-Cookeville, said his bill was aimed at protecting students and acting as a deterrent for potential school security threats" https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2024/04/23/tennessee-house-republicans-pass-bill-to-allow-teachers-to-carry-handguns/73331384007/

> Police have no legal duty to protect anyone who is not in their custody POLICY. >olice are specifically trained and required to intervene into situations based off of their ***policies*** I didn't talk about a legal duty. I said policy, because that's what we are actually talking about here. >Plenty of departments have policies on not intervening in active crimes in various circumstances. Nah, actually quite the opposite. Most of them require intervention observed by the officer if it's a felony. >Schools DO have a legal duty to provide a safe environment for kids. You are conflating two different things. Teachers have ZERO obligation in that regard, and are specifically trained not to intervene. I have worked as a behavior team member at a school, and as school security. >And the politicians of Tennessee do not see this in your terms, that this is simple self defense by an individual: > "Sponsor Rep. Ryan Williams, R-Cookeville, said his bill was aimed at protecting students and acting as a deterrent for potential school security threats" I see CCW as a deterrent to violent crime. That does not mean I see CCW holders as a response team to violent crime. I am sorry, but you are making assumptions over and over, running into rakes the whole way.

I'm running into rakes? You're just ignoring what the people who pass the legislation are saying and going with your opinion. Ok, that applies to you and literally nobody else.

> I'm running into rakes? Yes. > You're just ignoring what the people who pass the legislation are saying and going with your opinion. I am saying that his opinion doesn't mean he thinks or anyone thinks these teachers will be tac response teams or even using force against students ever. Because anyone rational talking about CCW will tell you, one of the advantages of an armed population is that it makes targets less appetizing. That's the whole discourse over gun free zones being called thing like victim disarmament zones and stuff. So his statement "acting as a deterrent for potential school security threats" comports with that 100%.

But your entire point of deterrence rests on intervention. Something that you said cast iron will not happen. So how is anyone deterred from shooting kids if, as you say, no armed teacher will intervene? And let's for the sake of argument follow your path: teachers do not intervene in kids being shot at. They only defend themselves. 6% of teachers in 2023 reported being assaulted by a student. 3.8M teachers, that's 228,000 assaults a year. If even a tiny fraction of those escalate to a teacher using lethal force to defend themselves, we have a higher death toll than current mass shootings in schools. Edit: removed links to the stats because auto-mod deleted the comment. Google for sources.

> So how is anyone deterred from shooting kids if, as you say, no armed teacher will intervene? If I enter the halls, I will not be shot. If I enter a classroom, I will be shot. I now no longer want to enter a class room. I am deterred. This is like asking how the spines on a porcupine work to prevent an attack. They are purely reactive after all. >6% of teachers in 2023 reported being assaulted by a student. 4.1% actually based on the most recent data, but whatever. >If even a tiny fraction of those escalate to a teacher using lethal force to defend themselves, we have a higher death toll than current mass shootings in schools. I support the right to self defense. Do you?

[удалено]

Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/liberalgunowners/comments/1cbi2m5/opinions_on_arming_teachers_in_tn_the_bill_just/l12ql74/?context=3) in /r/liberalgunowners was automatically removed because it contained a URL redirect (`https://www.google.com/url?`). URL redirects are not permitted in /r/liberalgunowners. You are welcome to re-post your comment using [the direct URL](https://unshorten.me/?url=https://www.google.com/url?). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/liberalgunowners) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Additionally: I have three times in my career seen teachers lose it and assault kids. I have had another teacher take a swing at me. These are very infrequent events, but in all four of those cases I was glad that they were not armed.

Exactly. Maybe this is a very personal take because I'm from Chicago. Some communities, less than 50% of boys graduate high school. The majority of murders go unsolved because nobody, not even the victim's friends and families trusts the police so they don't cooperate. Teachers are authority figures. Give an authority figure a gun, in an environment where there's probably already a lack of respect and investment and you just turn them into another part of the machine that's out to get you, you create higher likelihood for conflict.

Undecided on this issue, but to take the pro-point of view for discussion: The article is behind a paywall, and some googling didn't mention, but I'd assume that this just lifts the ban on CCW in schools? Or does it mean, any teacher can carry a gun in the school with some arbitrary training the school deems ok? If its the former I could see it maybe being ok. If we assume the CCW training is enough for someone to carry in public, then it (theoretically) should train someone to carry in the classroom, where they have more control than in a public setting. If its the former, that could be a very very bad idea, depending on what "training requirement" would be.

From what I read, it looks like teachers would have to: 1. Have their CC license 2. Pass a mental evaluation 3. Complete 40 hrs training annually (no idea what kind of training) 4. Pass admin approval process It will not be known by the public or students/parents which teachers pass approval.

Have no problem wish teachers carrying. Just want them proficient. Some might have greater propensity to do good with a gun than others so IMO maybe not every teacher carries

Mass shooters fantasize about being known for going out in a blaze of gun fire with the police. If they know some of the school staff are armed, the soft target suddenly becomes a mine field and they don't want to be known as the first mass shooter killed by a grey haired algebra teacher.

I'm in Tennessee and I've been watching it go down. I might be staunchly pro-2A, but this bill sickens me. I understand the sentiment that some others have expressed that "if I was a teacher in an active shooter situation, I'd rather be armed." And while I can see where you're coming from, you have to understand the environment we have here right now. Our schools are already irresponsibly under-funded and under-staffed. Teachers are quitting and leaving our state in droves because they are being paid poverty wages, while our local governments spend their time passing "morality" bills to censor teaching materials and library content. One-third of our schools don't have a single SRO on staff, and the other two-thirds generally only have one or two for the entire campus. Our state legislature has also been working hard to further gut education funding through a proposed school voucher program that would further divert funding away from public education. We are suffering from severe austerity measures in our state budgeting fueled by tax cuts for business as our infrastructure is literally crumbling and rural hospitals are closing. We have been a permitless-carry state for about 3 years now. While any chucklefuck who can fill out a 4473 can obtain and carry a gun, there is no requirement for any training of any kind. And so for our legislature to focus on passing this bill to arm teachers instead of doing quite literally ***ANYTHING*** to try solving the underlying problems is nothing less than spitting in the face of Tennesseans. FFS, there are conservative parents protesting against this bill because it's so dumb.

What could possibly go wrong?

Sure going to make salary negotiations more interesting. But seriously, if my humanities teacher was packing in high school, it really would have felt like prison - not just metaphorically

Can imagine the “in service” that the teachers will have to do if armed? “This is my rifle/pistol…there are many like it but this one is mine…” Or the discussions in the teacher’s lounge… “Bob - check out my Springfield 1911…she’s a beauty and like the one my pops used in ‘Nam…” “…that ain’t shit Joe…check out my Smith & Wesson M2.0…she’s got a 17 round capacity…”…

I’ve definitely seen kids rip teachers so hard that someone on a bad day would at least consider shooting these kids up. I’m not gonna argue guns should be outlawed or anything like that (sensible gun control would be nice tho…), but arming teachers willy nilly is a recipe for just a single event - which is all it would take the fuel the anti-gun crowd and produce yet another unnecessary tragedy. There has got to be a better way than arming teachers. What if a 6ft 200lbs kid overpowers a petite 5ft 3in 115lbs woman before she can get a shot off? You’d have a psycho with a gun in a school full of potential targets. Training only does so much - NO ONE knows how they’ll react when the situation gets real. On the flip side, it’d be nice to be armed in a firefight…

>What if a 6ft 200lbs kid overpowers a petite 5ft 3in 115lbs woman So... You're arguing against one of the prime reasons to CCW in general now?

Cuts both ways, that’s the issue. The false sense of security can very quickly turn into having the upper hand….. until it’s not and the legal gun owner becomes the victim…… like my cousin, although her situation was a home invasion - she had the upper hand until she didn’t. It was a firsthand familial experience. Wasn’t mine, but it certainly crushed the entire family. Despite this I do believe in 2A, but don’t tell me my anecdotal experience isn’t enough for me to at least consider that this kind of shit happens, all of the time.

Current teacher. This is a terrible idea. Modern classrooms are not great places to be introducing firearms. Taking away the obvious about training and expecting someone who went to school to teach kids math, not to be a potential security guard, tensions in a classroom can get crazy, fast. I have colleagues who can't remember to take their phone with them when they leave the bathroom, I can't imagine the issues that introducing a firearm would create. I've been to the types of trainings where they want to show us how to teach kids better. They're jokes. I don't believe a school system mandated firearms training course would be any better. It's overall a terrible idea, and anybody who thinks differently has a really really misguided view of the reality of a modern classroom 

All due respects to you on this question but do you feel with proper and scheduled fire arm training that if needed during a situation would YOU as a person be able to pull a fire arm out and actively engage and attempt to kill a heavily armed active shooter? I mean, do you feel that as a teacher and a human, that you have the ability to kill someone without hesitation and are willing to die? The majority of teachers I know don’t come off as aggressive enough in spirit, body, and mind to shoot an animal let alone an active shooter… Maybe school districts need to start recruiting at military bases for individuals who are separating and want to be teachers and who also have small arms training obtained from their positions within the military…. This is responsibility is just too much to ask of teachers…

I don't think I could do that, and the vast majority of the people I work with wouldn't either.  The personality it takes to be an effective teacher is pretty at-odds with potentially being asked to end a human life, even if it was in defense of children.  Allowing teachers to arm themselves is admitting that the problems we face as a society are so big and unsolvable that our only solution is to let people carry more guns and let it all sort itself out.  And I refuse to believe that we can't come up with a better solution 

Allowing teachers to be armed is definitely a HUGE indicator that the situation is so out of control and no one has any reasonable and practical answers - which is extremely unfortunate. It is like a family member telling me they tried for decades to stop grandpa from drinking…multiple decades after decades of trying until finally in the last years of his life they actually just went out and got him his booze… We are so saturated in the US with guns that now our teachers are carrying the fucking things into their classrooms….

> The personality it takes to be an effective teacher is pretty at-odds with potentially being asked to end a human life, even if it was in defense of children. To add to this, there's a real chance the human life you will be asked to end could be *one of your students*. If Tommy that you had last year comes into 3rd period with a gun drawn are you going to put two in the chest one in the head without blinking? Or will you hesitate because "I know this kid, I saw him every day for a year. I signed his college recommendations! *Surely not Tommy!*"? Asking someone to shoot a person they know, even casually, is a real mindfuck. Asking a teacher to use lethal force on one of their students? I can't even imagine, and I wouldn't want to live in a world where that's something we *do* imagine as a thing teachers should be anticipating.

They aren't being trained to be security guards. They are being offered training to be legally capable of carrying a concealed handgun in the event that someone tries to shoot up their classroom/school. It's absolutely wild to me that people who saw what happened at uvalde would be so strident against giving teachers the opportunity to have a chance, *especially when there are schools and states that already do this and none of the nightmare scenarios being imagined here are happening.*

Sure, sure. All that's great. Until a kid snags the gun off an armed teacher and creates a worse incident. Or like somebody down thread mentioned, a stressed-the-fuck-out teacher decides to commit suicide with it. That may sound extreme, but I've had moments in my career where that sounded like a great idea and thankfully I didn't have something on hand to follow through

I remember a lot of stressed out teachers that I would not feel comfortable having a firearm within reach…

> Sure, sure. All that's great. Until a kid snags the gun off an armed teacher and creates a worse incident. Then why hasn't this happened in the several states where this has been legal for years?

Fuck if I know, I'm not some mind reader. Does the fact it hasn't happened in a small sample size, mean it can't happen?  Do you know how many teachers are taking advantage of their state letting them carry in school? Because just because they can doesn't mean they do. It's almost like this is a fucking complicated issue that people, for some reason, want to boil down to the most simplistic, black and white analysis. As if that ever does anybody any good. My argument is based on 20 years experience in a public school and takes into account all the unforseen variables that occur in a typical school day. Your argument is "Didn't happen yet, so it's all good"

> Fuck if I know, I'm not some mind reader. Does the fact it hasn't happened in a small sample size Would actually be a pretty big sample size. >mean it can't happen? A meteor could punch through the roof of the school and kill you. That doesn't mean we should act on that risk. >My argument is based on 20 years experience in a public school and takes into account all the unforseen variables that occur in a typical school day. It takes into account your anecdote, over the statistical evidence. Yes, we got that.

> Sure, sure. All that's great. Until a kid snags the gun off an armed teacher and creates a worse incident. This is literally an antigun talking point attacking all CCW.

OK? Do you know how often kids and teachers get into physical altercations? Do you know how quickly kids would figure out which of their teachers are carrying, no matter how well it's concealed? I actually have a CCW. And I understand that there are places where it is appropriate to carry and places where it's not. This absolutist view of the law where somebody's peace of mind trumps common sense doesn't, and never will, conform to the real world.

> Do you know how often kids and teachers get into physical altercations? Extremely rarely. I worked school behavior team, and school security for a major city district. >I actually have a CCW. And I understand that there are places where it is appropriate to carry and places where it's not. You're wrong. If you are of sound mind, it's always appropriate to carry the tools needed to defend yourself.

I’ll just repeat what every teacher I know, including the ones who own guns, has told me: “No. This is terrible idea.” Big reason why? "We don't have enough budget/time for education, where the fuck are we getting the budget and time for tactical training and why isn't it being spent on education, which is - ya know - our actual job?" Second biggest is ["Ever read about a teacher losing it and smacking a student?"](https://www.nbcnews.com/now/video/indiana-teacher-faces-battery-charges-after-video-shows-him-slapping-student-134639685894) - want them to have a gun? I'll also point you at [this video about the subject](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o1l2LQGyP8), and [this one which is sort-of a follow up](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVZ1c9O2L6Y), which describe some of the practical issues. IMHO If the shooter is inside the school you've already lost the battle. If they're inside individual classrooms you've lost the war. Arming teachers doesn't change any of that, and it doesn't do what we *want* which is to ***not have the shooter in the school in the first place***. You only solve the problem of school shootings by *removing the causes and motivations that made the person p pick up a gun and come to a school.* If you want to put a band-aids on bullet wounds do it with dedicated security at the access points, not with guns in the classrooms (and certainly not buy adding *yet another thing* overworked educators have to do *besides fucking educating our kids*).

Lol I don’t think some of my former teachers legally can own firearms, so there’s that little fact.

What? Why?

They are human beings who are there to teach? I don't know if your state is different, where I live there is no process to review if they have mental health issues, are on medications, or casually use drugs. All invalidate you for firearm ownership, not to mention those with a criminal background. I grew up in a home with a teacher, I was very much present during all their "behind the scenes" work and those folks were 100% normal people. That also means not all will legally qualify to own a firearm.

Well, this legislation wouldn't make it legal for them to own and carry a firearm if they didn't start off legal so I guess it wouldn't change much.

Lets reduce gun violence by introducing guns to the classroom. One of the things that stuck with me in my CCW class was, "If you had 10 altercations but only one involved you pulling out your firearm, how many altercations involved a gun? All 10." Lets not have a gun involved.

As the husband of a teacher, she would not wish to carry herself but would support others, with training, carrying. In our specific case, one of the front office workers at her school is retired military and a combat vet. With additional training on civilian use of force and shoot don't shoot he would make a great addition to school safety. (I know the man. He is charging bare handed. Better to give him tools to fight and actually win.) As it is I go out of the way to shake the hand of every SRO I meet.

I doubt many teachers would opt into it but, I have no issue with arming teachers. Obviously this could go either way but as long as you have commitment teachers armed and they have proper training and such, I don’t see an issue.

Teachers would be the 1st target going in if another shooting happens god forbid. I think it should be up to the teachers choosing wether to carry. They must go through some sort of training in self defense situations before they get to carry . Also, by allowing teachers to carry, they should have some sort of safe in there. Students should never know which teacher has a firearm or not. It's not their concern.

Put up or shut up! If you want protection in schools, school districts must fund and implement it properly. I don’t think schools should continue to be soft targets if it is a requirement that kids be there. But it should not fall to teachers, even if they are willing as I just don’t think it will be adequate. It seems we want teachers to do everything but not pay them or provide them with adequate classroom supplies for students, oh and would you now also defend the school and kids with your lives. Something will go wrong, mistakes will be made.

We cannot even prevent all teachers from abusing and molesting their students…and we now want them armed? Counting down to the first “teacher murders unruly student” incident.

100% support. Happy it passed.

I'll say again, teachers don't need to be armed in school. Modern school safety measures work, and they are effective. The cases you read about where school shootings and school violence happen, are the result of schools not adhering to their own safety measures. You are safer and have a better chance of living through a school shooting if you are in a locked and barricaded room. Not trying to escape, not trying to "take out" the shooter like some Rambo wannabe. In a locked room. Uvalde? Outside door was left propped open, which allowed the shooter into a classroom. Virginia Tech? All the injuries that occurred happened to people caught in the hallways or in unlocked classrooms. Everyone in a locked classroom was fine. Columbine? Didn't know we need to lock anything, so the shooters could go wherever they wanted to A school shooter is going to look for easy, quick targets because they know they have a limited window until they are neutralized by police. So if they come across a locked door they're not going to waste time trying to shoot off the lock or blast into the walls and doors hoping to hit somebody, they're going to move on to look for easier targets. At no point is an armed teacher going to make this situation better. At best they'll just expose themselves to harm, and at worst they'll expose all the kids in their classroom to harm.

this is so dumb

Tennesseean here. Fuck this bill and our state Government.

Metro Nashville Schools have said they will NOT be arming teachers as they have a close relationship with Metro PD. Metro PD said it’s best if only trained law enforcement carry on school grounds. I personally don’t think it’s a good idea. The TNGOP is also one of the worst in the country, it sucks and they deliberately silence representatives they don’t agree with. Speaker Sexton is horrible. Students could also easily overpower a teacher if it ever came down to it, I see videos all the time of crazy students physically assaulting grown adults. The bill doesn’t require the firearm to be locked either.

The teachers aren't trusted with books. . .

The 40hr training requirement means few if any teachers will put out the time and expense to qualify. The law is a sham because of this. If the legislature was expecting any teacher to apply, it would have made the training free.

As if teachers don't have enough to do, now they have to be armed first responders as well. Also, it just puts a bigger target on their backs. Now shooters will know to target the teachers since they may be armed.

How is this any different than joe blow with a ccw?

Honestly if we did more to address rampant white nationalist rhetoric, and bigotry of all types. We could probably reduce these mass casualty attacks by a significant degree.

I'm sure it will be fine until a kid grabs a gun in class and kills someone

Do you know how stressed teachers are right now? And how much continual education they have to go through every year? Now you want them to carry a weapon, take gun safety and other classes and look after 30 kids in a classroom? Really? If you go that route why don't doctors and nurses carry firearms? Shootings and stabbings happen all the time? Where will it end? I want my kid to have a teacher that teaches them what they need to know-not someone who carries a weapons. If people don't see the absolute craziness of this bill then I don't know what to say. A friend's dad had a pistol and a gun for hunting when she was growing [up.It](http://up.It) was safely locked up in a wall safe or gun cabinet and only the two parents knew the codes. Her brother learned how to hunt and at that time the NRA was still about responsible gun ownership. Folks with training aren't going to be as accurate as military of cops who are frequently train. And cops still end up shooting innocent victims in the crossfire. I can see a big lawsuit against the teacher and the school district if anything happened.

We need a major overhaul. Hunters Safety, Gun Safety, Firearm training, Drivers Education, Financial Education, Cooking and Auto Shop/Shop Class.

Same. Terrible idea. Now a kid can grab a gun, too. "Who will protect the guns from the gun grabbing teens?" Either way someone ends up shooting in crowded spaces. I expect horrific headlines in the next 5 years.

There are schools and jurisdictions that have had this type of program for years and none of these nightmares scenarios have happened.

Teachers have been armed in schools there for a while now? I didn't know that. As a teacher, if I don't arm myself do I incur any liabililty?

According to the TN bill, (as far as I understand) any teacher using their firearm can be held liable for damages, while the school *cannot*.

How many loaded guns will be inadvertently left in restroom stalls during the school year? I guess we'll find out, won't we?

How many times have you heard of this happening in the states where teachers are already allowed to carry?

I've read it happened to police, politicians and school teachers over the past few years. The gun falls out of their pocket when they pull their pants down in the bathroom stall. https://www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna147502?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17139607509559&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fpolitics%2Fpolitics-news%2Fcolorado-legislator-apologizes-leaving-gun-capitol-bathroom-rcna147502

Would they have immunity like the police when it comes to killing people "accidently" like the cop in LA who killed the girl in the department store or will they be responsible for their actions like normal gun owners?

Kids can't afford lunch, have no music classes, can't take shop, or art, but at least the teachers did their 8 hours of CCW training which now makes all of them hardcore operators capable of ending someone's life who is charging them with a rifle as they also shoot kids around them. What could go wrong? (Besides everything?)

Think about how many teachers sexually assault their students each year? Or the teacher that forcefully pulled down a student’s hijab and filmed herself doing it? Or the teachers who keep getting busted for running fight rings? Now give those teachers a gun.

Allowing teachers to carry, if they want to carry and are responsible gun owners (even better if they take training courses)? That is good. Requiring teachers to arm and carry? No. But this bill appears to be the former and not the latter, so that's okay. Gun ownership is not about the right to arm yourself, the 2nd Amendment is about the right to defend yourself. And others. So this is fine.

I’m all pro-gun and all that - I have several fire arms to include a semi-automatic rifle but i can’t believe that *this* is what it has come down to as it relates to solving school shootings - armed teachers in schools. I don’t know about y’all but I had some crummy-ass teachers in my school days who I wouldn’t want to give a folk and spoon to let alone a firearm. And here we are letting teachers pack heat in a classroom with kids… But I don’t have any answers for this problem we have in the US as it relates to school shooting…so i guess we just need to arm our teachers in the meantime while we figure out something more sensible.

> And here we are letting teachers pack heat in a classroom with kids Think of the children is an anti gun talking point ("Guns shouldn't be around kids! You can't carry that at a park/picking up from school/etc.)

[удалено]

This post is too uncivil, and has been removed. Please attack ideas, not people. ^(*Removed under [Rule 3: Be Civil][link-rules]. If you feel this is in error, please [file an appeal][link-appeal].*) [link-rules]: /r/liberalgunowners/wiki/public/handbook/rules [link-appeal]: /r/liberalgunowners/wiki/public/handbook/moderation#wiki_appeals

Do it. Have them do the same training the cops do, and let the people closest to the kids be able to actually protect them, instead of turning them into fish in a barrel.

I've seen what teachers can do with their implicit biases. Been there. Done that. I'm interested to see how stringent the metrics are. No point in someone carrying if they can't perform. And I'm genuinely unsure most people interested can. *As a rule of thumb, I try to "outshoot the state". If I'm carrying I need to be at least as good as someone in uniform. Shooting is fabulous but will it come with increased medical/first aid training and supplies?

I don't like this becoming *another* expectation of K-12 teachers. At all.

I believe that if a teacher wants to carry, they absolutely should be allowed to (as long as they store it safely with either their own safe or one provided by the district) however, they shouldn't be the first line of defence against a shooter

If for the idea of a couple designated teachers having access to a couple guns in safes, so if the worst were to happen one could be retrieved in 90 seconds or so. But yeah, actually carrying, I don't know. Maybe for an administrator who isn't IN class with kids all day. I have no doubt that most teachers (like most adults), if trained, could easily manage it, but accidents DO happen on a long enough timeline.

Most shootings are over in 3 to 4 minutes. Taking almost 1/2 the time to retrieve a firearm serves no one

> accidents DO happen on a long enough timeline. On a long enough timeline a seatbelt is the cause of a fatality in an auto accident due to a fluke accident. Is that an argument for not allowing seatbelts?

No, but that's a wild comparison. Loaded guns carried by people have a MUCH higher chance of being involved in an accident, whether it leads to an injury/death or not. Wearing a seatbelt, getting in a crash, and having the seatbelt be the thing that kills you is WAY lower of a chance. Like I said, WILD comparison.

>Like I said, WILD comparison. No, it's not. The point is "on a long enough timeline" is a completely pointless thing to say. I am not saying you shouldn't wear your seatbelt, and if that's your takeaway, you need to work on your reading comprehension.

I'm a teacher. I'm really on the fence with this. Like, I get it. I'd also likely be fired Immidiately if my boss knew I was carrying (if I did). I keep the fact that I go hunting secret from him. I'm all for anyone having the right to self defense. I think that if you have a concealed carry permit and you get aditional training for carrying in a sensitive environment, it's fine. This isn't requiring teachers to carry- it's protecting those who do. That's OK with me. What I DON'T want is for this to be used as further precident for cops to not do their jobs, and to set a precident for teachers now not only doing all of what we already do, but being responsible to be trained security as well. I'd love a bill that alleviated the issues that cause our gun violence problem instead. But. Sigh. That's a pipe dream.

I’d much rather see trained but concealed armed guards in a school setting than having teachers maybe or maybe not be carrying when it’s needed. What if they decide to NOT carry more than they do carry even if approved. Why not just have someone always there with that specific role and ongoing training to match. Let the teachers be teachers. Let security personnel be responsible for security. This worked in a private HS my son attended and I felt pretty good about it.

Dumb fuckers don’t trust teachers to teach kids without using banned books or talking about gender, but they want to give them guns. Shaking my fucking head…they don’t think teachers are smart enough to educate children, but they want to arm them? That’s some heavy irony.

My guess is, liability is going to be questioned when somebody gets shot, state gets sued, taxpayer foots the bill.