13 year old fires AK47 in school

[GLBLWARMR]

14-year-old fires once, hits man in head:

Sight alignment, sight picture. Sight Alignment, sight picture. Someone probably took the time to teach the kid the fundamentals of marksmanship.

[Wisha Haddan H3]

All humor aside, there's a lot of risk allowing teachers to carry handguns.

Just carrying a firearm doesn't make you competent in marksmanship, stress management, crisis management, fire suppression, threat incursion or coordination with police and SWAT. At the very least, police could mistake an armed teacher for the intruder. Plus, there are unstable people in every profession.

My point is that not everyone should be armed. I don't mind teachers carrying firearms ... but imo, they would have to register their carry weapon so the Principal and law enforcement know who's armed on campus. And they would need annual training in gun safety, marksmanship, crisis management and command & control with local police. They obviously would have to pass a criminal background check and have no history of domestic violence.

As for the 14-year-old saving his mom's life ... that is AWESOME. That took a lot of guts and composure under pressure.

[PARAGON]

Originally Posted by Wisha Haddan H3

All humor aside, there's a lot of risk allowing teachers to carry handguns.

Just carrying a firearm doesn't make you competent in marksmanship, stress management, crisis management, fire suppression, threat incursion or coordination with police and SWAT. At the very least, police could mistake an armed teacher for the intruder. Plus, there are unstable people in every profession.

My point is that not everyone should be armed. I don't mind teachers carrying firearms ... but imo, they would have to register their carry weapon so the Principal and law enforcement know who's armed on campus. And they would need annual training in gun safety, marksmanship, crisis management and command & control with local police. They obviously would have to pass a criminal background check and have no history of domestic violence.

As for the 14-year-old saving his mom's life ... that is AWESOME. That took a lot of guts and composure under pressure.

You have no clue what you are talking about. No one needs annual training in markmanship. You shoot constantly. Gun safety is not something you train for annually either. Either you know gun safety or you don't.

Just because someone has a gun doesn't mean that they have the capacity to handle a certain situation... given. But to assume that, in your little fairy world, that a registered handgun and the other crap you read somewhere would have an impact is seriously flawed.

No carry individual would have need for any command and control training. Nor do they need to know, other than what they receive in the average conceal carry course, how to interact with LEOs. If someone doesn't have common sense, they should not have the handgun on them, and they are more than likely are not going to make the best decisions when faced with the fast-moving high-stressed situations that this accounts for.

[Wisha Haddan H3]

Originally Posted by PARAGON

You have no clue what you are talking about. No one needs annual training in markmanship. You shoot constantly. Gun safety is not something you train for annually either. Either you know gun safety or you don't.

Just because someone has a gun doesn't mean that they have the capacity to handle a certain situation... given. But to assume that, in your little fairy world, that a registered handgun and the other crap you read somewhere would have an impact is seriously flawed.

No carry individual would have need for any command and control training. Nor do they need to know, other than what they receive in the average conceal carry course, how to interact with LEOs. If someone doesn't have common sense, they should not have the handgun on them, and they are more than likely are not going to make the best decisions when faced with the fast-moving high-stressed situations that this accounts for.

Are we talking about the same thing? I'm talking about registering educators for concealed carry in the classroom ... not about concealed carry in general or the right to bear arms. I'm only saying make educators learn, train and demonstrate their proficiency before they take the responsibility of carrying concealed in school.

I have been shooting for 15 years. I am well-versed in gun safety, disassembly and maintenance and I value my 2nd amendment rights. But if I were a teacher carrying concealed to defend my students, these are things I would require of myself before I took on that responsibility. And it's what I would expect from my fellow teachers.

You're right about "training" in marksmanship and gun safety. I should have said "certifying or qualifying" (my mistake). Not every certification would have to be annual, either. But proficiency requires practice, and how do we know everyone's practicing? If a teacher accepts the responsibility of bearing arms to protect the classroom, should I just take their word that they understand (and practice) gun safety, can hit a target, and can work with police and others in a crisis? Should I accept that blindly and without verification?

No.

There is huge value in requiring background checks and "concealed classroom carry" permits for armed educators. If nothing else, at least police know how many armed teachers are inside and who they are, so they don't get shot when SWAT storms the building.

But more to the point, if teachers are going to be responsible for defending our classrooms by force, it's realistic to set basic requirements for concealed classroom carry. They should demonstrate that they understand gun handling and safety, can hit a target consistently and have logged at least the minimum time on the firing range. Only the Principal and administrators would probably need training to understand police command & control, but all teachers would benefit from police terminology so they can follow or pass on instructions. And if they're going to take on a gunman, they must understand cover, concealment and backstops, and be able to put the bullets where they count under pressure. Or else why carry in the first place?

The real fairy world is letting teachers decide for themselves if they ought carry concealed, blindly trusting them to do the right thing under pressure, and then actually believing your kids are safer for it.

[PARAGON]

Originally Posted by Wisha Haddan H3

Are we talking about the same thing? I'm talking about registering educators for concealed carry in the classroom ... not about concealed carry in general or the right to bear arms. I'm only saying make educators learn, train and demonstrate their proficiency before they take the responsibility of carrying concealed in school.

I have been shooting for 15 years. I am well-versed in gun safety, disassembly and maintenance and I value my 2nd amendment rights. But if I were a teacher carrying concealed to defend my students, these are things I would require of myself before I took on that responsibility. And it's what I would expect from my fellow teachers.

You're right about "training" in marksmanship and gun safety. I should have said "certifying or qualifying" (my mistake). Not every certification would have to be annual, either. But proficiency requires practice, and how do we know everyone's practicing? If a teacher accepts the responsibility of bearing arms to protect the classroom, should I just take their word that they understand (and practice) gun safety, can hit a target, and can work with police and others in a crisis? Should I accept that blindly and without verification?

No.

There is huge value in requiring background checks and "concealed classroom carry" permits for armed educators. If nothing else, at least police know how many armed teachers are inside and who they are, so they don't get shot when SWAT storms the building.

But more to the point, if teachers are going to be responsible for defending our classrooms by force, it's realistic to set basic requirements for concealed classroom carry. They should demonstrate that they understand gun handling and safety, can hit a target consistently and have logged at least the minimum time on the firing range. Only the Principal and administrators would probably need training to understand police command & control, but all teachers would benefit from police terminology so they can follow or pass on instructions. And if they're going to take on a gunman, they must understand cover, concealment and backstops, and be able to put the bullets where they count under pressure. Or else why carry in the first place?

The real fairy world is letting teachers decide for themselves if they ought carry concealed, blindly trusting them to do the right thing under pressure, and then actually believing your kids are safer for it.

No, the fairy world is the fact that it matters differently because to you because it's a classroom when that same person can be carrying in more high risk situations where children are present and security is much less.

I just have one question for you.....

fire suppression?

[Wisha Haddan H3]

Originally Posted by PARAGON

No, the fairy world is the fact that it matters differently because to you because it's a classroom when that same person can be carrying in more high risk situations where children are present and security is much less.

Took a while to sort out what you wrote. I think you're saying that concealed carry by a teacher is less risky than on the street because of campus security. And therefore it only requires the same regulation as traditional concealed carry.

I disagree.

During regular carry, your goal is to protect yourself and family from a person or part of town you have reason to fear. Children may be present, but you don't have the explicit responsibility to care for and protect other people's kids every day. School attacks also take place on a much larger scale, potentially involving hundreds of students and faculty. Add to this that teachers are far outnumbered as the few adult decision-makers on campus. What's more, they must be able to shoot down a student attacker they know and care about, as well as someone who may not be attacking them directly.

These are important differences in scope and scale. It's a higher degree of responsiblity, which requires a correspondingly higher standard of training and qualification. Simply allowing teachers to carry concealed because they want to will not make schools safer. It only creates a false sense of security.

It would be like having an epidemic and expecting to protect student health by allowing teachers to carry stethoscopes, meanwhile refusing to require special training on their use, instruction on which symptoms to identify (and how to identify them), or any protocols on what to do when they find something. The teachers would manage their own training and self-assessment, and figure out how to work with health care professionals by themselves, hoping to do the right thing while students live or die by their actions and decisions.

That lack of training would be unthinkable in healthcare. It's all the more important regarding lethal weapons, educators and crime in school. It would have taken a lot more than a lucky shot from a concealed weapon to end the hostage crisis in Bailey or the massacre at Columbine ... much more preparation than you get in the average concealed carry course. We should either require a high standard of training or not let teachers carry concealed in the first place.

[f5fstop]

Originally Posted by Wisha Haddan H3

All humor aside, there's a lot of risk allowing teachers to carry handguns.

Just carrying a firearm doesn't make you competent in marksmanship, stress management, crisis management, fire suppression, threat incursion or coordination with police and SWAT. At the very least, police could mistake an armed teacher for the intruder. Plus, there are unstable people in every profession.

My point is that not everyone should be armed. I don't mind teachers carrying firearms ... but imo, they would have to register their carry weapon so the Principal and law enforcement know who's armed on campus. And they would need annual training in gun safety, marksmanship, crisis management and command & control with local police. They obviously would have to pass a criminal background check and have no history of domestic violence.

As for the 14-year-old saving his mom's life ... that is AWESOME. That took a lot of guts and composure under pressure.

Some points I agree, some I don't. As for the background checks, I agree, but I believe in most states they do this now. Yes, if there is a COP on site and the principle as well as others would need to know which teach has a gun and who doesn't.
The Senator on TV stated it would be similar to the arming of pilots. Totally voluntary, with training. It would be used as the last line of defense. The defense of the kids being shot at by a nut with a gun, while everyone is waiting for the police to respond.
The important fact to remember, is the teacher with a legal gun, would have to abide by all state laws, and be aware, he or she may have to shoot a kid someday, in defense of other kids or adults. This would be the hardest part to overcome.
In most states, almost anyone can obtain a permit to carry a gun. In 2001, FBI statistics mentioned that 28 percent of handguns pulled on a criminal were taken away and used against the owner. However, that means 72 percent used the handgun in self-defense; whether they had to pull the trigger or not. (Note: the study mentioned that 17 percent of police officers also lost their gun to the criminal.)
Many carry a gun, but quite few will never pull the trigger even to save their life or the lives of their love ones.
Practice is good, since during a time of extreme stress when you have to pull a gun in defense, the response of pulling a gun is mostly muscle reaction; muscles trained by years of training*. However, shooting a paper target, does not condition someone to actually pull the trigger on another human being.

(*Years of training is not standing fifty feet away from a paper target. Years of training is defensive training developed and taught by places such as the SIG Academy in Exeter, NH., H&K Defensive Training, Ashburn, VA or Orbendorf, Germany, Thunder Ranch, FBI Training Facility in Quantico, VA. or Academy of Personal Protection and Security. These places are known by me, but there are plenty of other places across the USA.)