County involved people in mental health crisis. Among the police shootings reviewed by KPCC were dozens of instances where officers intervened to stop violent criminals. Black people were shot by police at three times their numbers in the population, compared to other races. Law enforcement agencies aren't required to report data on police shootings, and few do. Series Credits. Between Jan. The last time an on-duty officer was charged for shooting a civilian in Los Angeles County was in September In a plea deal, he was convicted of one count of shooting at an occupied motor vehicle and sentenced to five years in state prison.
According to KPCC's analysis of district attorney records, one in four people shot by officers were unarmed. Of those people who were armed, two-thirds had a firearm and 57 shot at police. In of the shootings reviewed by KPCC, officers did not try less lethal weapons before using deadly force. Of those, 47 were unarmed.
Officers shot people in the act of fleeing, or after a pursuit. Officers said they shot 20 people who were unarmed because they feared the person was trying to hit them with a vehicle. But most law enforcement officers only receive between six and 10 hours of training on how to deal with the mentally ill. Instead of putting his hands on the patrol car, Luckett set his beer on the hood and allegedly dropped his left hand toward his waistband.
A KPCC review of medical examiner records over the past five years found law enforcement officers in Los Angeles County fatally shot black people at triple the rate of whites and Latinos. In 11 percent of the officer-involved shootings reviewed by KPCC, prosecutors found officers shot a civilian in order to protect innocent people who may have been in danger. Avendano and his partner yelled for Jeovany Mendoza to drop the knife. He refused and threatened to kill her. He died on the spot.
Did you read the artical? That being said by a person with months or years of experience. Do you really want kids to be around a shooter and an untrained civilian with a gun? But their advantage over you is the element of surprise. I have a nephew who was gunned down after returning to his residence after mid-term exams at Ohio State. His shooter was never caught. The gun was stolen from a resident on another street.
Even IF my nephew had a gun on him, a shooter sneaking up on him in the dark had the definite advantage. Ban guns? So once we ban guns the criminals will never be able to carryout their misdeeds right? I mean afterall criminals are law abiding citizens. Why do conservatives keep saying liberals want to ban guns? Wrong wrong wrong! Also the idea that the government will take your guns when they are legal is crazy.
Common sense is becoming very uncommon. My true condolences. It IS simple. Get RID of the damned things. The only reason that worked in Australia is that people that do this on the spear of the moment cant get a gun.. An illiterate Pakistani arms maker can create a fully functioning copy of an AK using nothing more high tech than a foot powered drill press, an anvil, a rat tailed file, and a couple of ball peen hammers.
What could a liberty-minded well educated home machine shop owner construct in the privacy of his own residence???http://perunda.com/is-this-all-there-is.php
Top Dallas-Fort Worth News
How about taking it at the root and taking all the measures possible not to be confronted by someone with a gun in the first place? Works very well here. I think there is a difference between deciding to carry a weapon for your personal safety and being charged by your school district to use a gun to protect your classroom. That is what I think is most missing from the conversations on this issue. Simply removing the gun-free status from schools so that teachers who so desire can carry a gun is one thing.
Making a formal policy expecting them to carry one is another. Teachers only use guns as a last resort when barricading failed. That does not make sense. School shooter did not expect any challenge. If every room he goes into is a fire fight, the shooter will shake as much as the teacher. Think about it. In this situation, as I would be dead LONG before I could reach my gun, and as a shooting is statistically unlikely, and carrying the gun which I would be dead before I could possibly use would mean putting a dangerous object in my classroom on a daily basis, likely for years before a shooting every happened if it ever did , putting my students at risk, I would rather not have the guns.
More children would have been safer through me not having one, and I would have been able to better do my job for the many students. I am in close contact with kids for 7 hours every day. How can I do that, with a gun on me? Did you even read the article? He covers this. Soldiers and police offers train constantly, over and over and over. A teacher barely has time to keep up with grading and schools lack the money for basic needs like pencils and computers. The idea is beyond ludicrous. Soldiers are trained and prepared to fight despite the uncertainty because that is their job.
Literally the reason they are there. Are you suggesting we give teachers full military training? In just about every shooting recently, it comes out that the guns were purchased legally. But that WILL happen if we start trying to fight fire with fire. Also, most of these shooters do intend to leave in body bags in the first place.
I think the only reasonable point here is decreasing response time, but the risks far outweigh the theoretical benefits. The assailant with a gun always has tactical advantage. Next thing is, a class of kids is studying Geography, and a gunman bursts into the room firing as he enters, killing the teacher and all 25 students in less than 30 seconds. How are the kids going to have time to reach into their desks or their pockets or wherever else they keep their guns, and open fire on the gunman?
The gunman always has the advantage of surprise. No gun massacre has ever been stopped by an armed civilian. Gun control via background checks and needs based assessment is the only solution. No 19 year old school kid needs an assault rifle that can kill 60 people in 30 seconds. Mass shootings have been stopped by armed citizens. Do a search. There is even video on YouTube. You can even find it on CNN!!! He was shot after leaving the church. Could it be that he was going somewhere else to kill?
Possibly, but not probable. The report also states that he should have never been allowed to have firearms. Thank you Daniel for your point. For Abe who tries to pick apart a single instance. As Daniel pointed out a simple search will reveal multiple. This post had 10 or 11 separate ones, and there are a number more.
Reading comprehension is key. Daniel posted a link to a specific incident. I followed that link. Watched the video and provided my thoughts. Maybe Daniel should have provided more links. Hello Anthony, so you are sugesting to fortify our schools!?! Make them look like a military compounds!?!? Send kinds to school with bullet vests!?!? This is equivalent to trying to put out a fire with gasoline. Matt Martin did a good job explaining why this is a bad idea. What is next we wake up in the morning and put bullet vest instate of shirts. We take our guns instate of my lunch boxes.
We dodge few bullets walking from your house to the car. We hop in our armor cars going to work. Going to any public place you have to go through security like what we have at the airports now , yes imagine security check points everywhere like the nightmare airports are this days. Is that the world you and your kids want to live in? Parkland had an armed guard. Try again. Why does everyone including the King Idiot of America suddenly think that these mass shooters will be deterred by the knowledge that someone in the school has a gun??
They were all prepared to die or take their own lives already. According to an FBI study about active shooter situations, police officers who engaged the shooter were wounded or killed in I know the first negative response to this post will say that if more people were armed this number would go up. I get it. Guns are fun. They go bang! And for those of you too lazy to get in shape and learn how to truly protect yourselves, they give you a false sense of security.
Totally agree. As a two times combat veteran, I feel that a few armed teachers is the solution. The goal is safety of students. Anybody would rather target a soft target, than a place where people will be armed. A potential shooter will most likely pick a different place than a school with armed personnel. Their picking their schools because they have a grudge that they want to settle. This country puts a stigma on mental health issues. If we focused more on the mental health of these kids and less on the gun control issue I think that we would see a significant difference. You want a fighting chance…to do what, exactly?
Officer Involved | KPCC
To accidentally hurt or kill even more people? Incidentally, I was active Army for 24 years myself, with 2 tours in Iraq, and been shot at as well luckily never wounded. They had deterrence with a guard. That is not why such targets are chosen anyway. School shooters may be sociopaths, they may be amoral, they may be mentally ill, but they are not cowards. Many go into these situations fully expecting to die and often do. So there is no deterrence effect.
The fact that a number of incidents have taken place at military facilities here in the US and abroad should make that clear. On the other hand, these events are very, very rare. Those guns could be stolen and used by students. Teachers could misuse those weapons and kill students or other teachers.
And there is little to no evidence that these marginally-trained teachers would be in any way effective at stopping the active shooter situations they were armed for in the first place. If they are confronted with armed resistance, these poor fools often eat one of their own bullets because they no longer can continue racking up a higher body count. It is a far, far better thing to have a firearm and not need to use it than it is to need a firearm and not have it…. Most mass murderers do not plan on survival. If you are going to stand tall against semi-auto rifle fire, the body bag is yours.
As a Marine Infantry Vet with 2 tours to Iraq in 04 and 05 which experienced MOUT operations that this soldier did not, I can say without any doubt in my mind that i would MUCH rather have armed teachers behind locked doors protecting MY child with a gun than a school full of neutered targets waiting for the slaughter.
As evidence of the COWARDICE of law enforcement in FL, I would MUCH prefer a teacher inside the school who is facing the threat have the opportunity to defend themselves and the lives of the children they most certainly would protect than expect some saving grave with a badge come deliver them. Evidence from past shootings makes it clear: most assailants have no intention of surviving. The threat of death is no deterrent. Now arm the teacher in this situation.
Maybe insane is inadequate to describe this idea. Excellent point. Some chance is better than no chance at all. Having teachers armed can serve as a deterrent. In Israel all their teachers are armed. Not true. As a teacher I can guarantee the fear and confusion we go through with just a practice drill. Children having mental breakdowns and needing us to be strong and I can guarantee pulling out a gun in this situation is not going to be a safe situation for anyone and the chances of children being hurt is worse. Arming trained individuals like he suggests is a much better answer.
Building bullet proof walls at the entrance of each school to keep people out would be a much better use of our time and money. If you know or suspect teachers to be armed, and you are determined to run amok in a school, you simply shoot tha teacher first. The teacher is in position of reacting to situations, and is not a clair voyant. You are making teachers a first target with no chance for defense. Matt is absolutely correct. Thanks Anthony. Many Are distorting this suggestion. They are saying SOME receive training, And not have to sit and wait in a classroom full of children for the gunman to cone in and get them, too.
You and your students holed up in a room frightened, hearing screams and shots, And just sit there to get yours? What say you? I say: Barricade, protect yourself and the students. I say for new laws be written to harshly punish parents who are gun owners and whose teens were somehow, which is no excuse, able to get a hold of their gun s! About that for a start? Most, if not all, are living with a ton of emotional pain and anguish and have likely been crying out for help in the form of self-destructive behaviors for years.
Yet no one pays attention! Look around you — you may know someone in that situation. What will you choose to do?
- Life is Balanced Living is Not!!
- The Trigger And The Choice: Part 1.
- A tract on duelling: wherein the opinions of some of the most celebrated writers on crown law are examined and corrected ... in order to ascertain the due distinction between manslaughter and murder.
- Ex Oblivione (Annotated Edition).
- trained to kill keller county cops book 6 Manual.
Will you genuinely care about him or her or will you turn yet another blind eye? This was the respo se of a deputy sheriff officer who was a thirty plus year veteran and twenty five years in that very position. A teacher carrying a gun will be the first target of a disgruntled bitter student or ex-student — a clear example of the power dynamic that the student likely resents, and of course the first person you need to kill in a massacre.
The student will also likely be better trained, more prepared and much more likely to be able to point a gun at someone and actually kill them. The student came to school with a plan to kill, the teacher did not. A gun in the hands of a deputy, trained and paid to stop such carnage? Just like there was in Florida? Oh, never mind, ignorant people never learn.
Mostly because they never listen. This article brings up some great points especially that arming all teachers is a silver bullet answer. Elite units like SWAT, yes. However, most departments only require their officers to qualify with their duty weapon once a year!
- Observing Primary Literacy.
- Kelly Thomas case: why police were acquitted in killing of homeless man - tozapocohe.ml?
- Tom Keller.
- Navigation menu.
A department requiring their officers to qualify just twice a year is considered progressive. Most officers do not train with their weapons beyond the week or 2 leading up to their qualification shoot. This is not true of all but any officer who trains seriously will be the first to tell you how disgusted he or she is by how little the other officers on their department train with their weapons.
Will disarming them make them LESS likely to be killed should the unthinkable happen in their school? Carrying firearms in rooms crowded full of children is a bad idea. Until one day, they put a loaded gun down in the bathroom of an elementary school, shoot themselves in the leg while using the restroom, or shoot themselves in the foot during class. All of these things have actually happened on school campuses where teachers with concealed carry permits and gun safety classes were allowed to carry their weapons. Sir, your response assumes far too much about the motivations of a shooter.
They may make some cowardly decisions but coward or not, they have a gun in their hands that can inflict mass death in seconds. And are persons intent on mass killings using logic? Are they in their right minds? Are they interested so much in preserving their own life? Ummmm…in many cases it has been determined or proven the shooter had a death wish or at least complete disregard for their own life or safety. That is mental illness in a nutshell. No sane person is ever compelled to inflict mass random death.
The results, guaranteed, will not be any better. And will most likely be worse. The one he attended!! School shooters are SO afraid of being shot, they commit suicide, 9 out of 10 times when they discover police have arrived on scene…. There is nothing more documented, than shooters choosing gun free zones on purpose.
It makes that feel as if they have an advantage… And you celebrating them as if they are some kind of celebrity is sickening. Yes and Sgt Martin, this is a military situation and not an ambush situation where hundreds of bullets are firing all at once. This has worked in Israel for 40 years and will work here. When seconds counted, Sheriff Scott Israel and his Deputies will waited outside until the shooter ran out of ammo.
Like President Trump, I would trust an armed, trained, and motivated teacher to do the right thing more than I would a police force full of gutless libs who weaseled their way into law enforcement through political favors. Absolutely, Sorry Sgt. I dont agree with it can only get worse bs, that makes no sense, at all. Dont protect yourself you might die is your expert advice? Yeah, I think Ill go another way. Thank you for your service Sir, I think you should have just a little more faith in American balls. That is simply not true. It is the thinking of someone who had not lived in that situation.
Really read what he is saying. He is saying that because of the uncertainty in that most chaotic, terrifying of situations is why we train soldiers, etc. Thinking about or having a gun when we imagine a situation like a school shooting makes you, me, most people FEEL safer; FEEL like we have a better chance with than without. But the statistics do not back it up. And neither does the person experience of Sgr Martin. You sir, are a smart, articulate man. Thank you for your level head, and knowledgeable opinion. At the police academy, we are taught not to wait for backup at a school shooting.
On average, seven people are shot every minute. You can bet that officers who are not part of a left wing sheriffs department are going to ruin on alone, outgunned, and ready to bring the fight to a spineless coward who is killing children. Police departments need to work with our schools and train them to be able to defend themselves.
Guns save lives, more than lives being lost anyway. Just the knowledge that teachers are armed, will send these cowards the message that there is a risk to their stupidity. I appreciate every soldier and their service… But you cannot compare Afghanistan to a school shooting. Some soldiers either deploy with, or return from deployment with a fear that is closer to their hearts than logic.
Conflict is scary, it is horrible, but it is not a reason to hide and cower behind leftist ideologies. Well written and your point is extremely well made! I totally agree with your position. Dan D, I will say I truly respect the fact that you are honest with yourself about this situation. You are spot on, if you are unsure that you can use a gun to protect yourself and others, you should never have one on you in a time of crisis. There is a saying, those that run live the longest. Very few people are fit to be sheep dogs and there is no dishonor in not being sure if you can take a life to save a life.
Myself on the other hand, I have had years of training, I have trained in pressure situations and STILL I am concerned about an active shooter situation, but make no mistake sir, I am prepared to defend myself, my family, and those that cannot defend themselves and will not hesitate to put anyone down to neutralize a threat.
If you are not prepared to take a life, never pull a gun on someone, ever. But still and all, one of your students. You remember talking to his mom, who was worried sick. When you spot him holding something that may or may not be a weapon?
What if it turns out that you were wrong— would the public and the courts be as generous with a teacher who shoots an unarmed teen as they are with police officers. Consider, Mitch Rapp, whether you would be equally certain of being able to take that shot if the person threatening you or your family WAS one of your family members. Appreciate both the article and the authors service. I believe your words would carry more weight if you tell that you have been in those types of situations. He was trained. The medic was trained.
Still chaos. There is no other way out to the plane legally we know criminals always find a way. That single portal could go far in making schools safer imho. Still trained staff and a very Fort Knox secure firearms safe in a school might simply dissuade a shooter to look for easier prey. But not the children. Plenty of well trained people fail to react, whilst untrained civilians can perform great acts of courage.
Thank you Mat for your passionate, well reasoned and well written response. I, too, am a veteran Vietnam. My experiences were not nearly as harrowing as yours I was on a ship! Thank you again. Very well written!! You story gives me chills. Never in a million years would I imagine comparing the safety of our children in schools to a war zone. Very compelling. Matt makes some very good points, However, there are other non-lethal methods that the school authorities can be equipped with that would serve as a deterrent, a stun gun, tear gas, Blinding Strobe Lighting, etc.
Other measures would include only one entrance to facility with metal detector, and requiring ID, locked during class, many one way exits. There certainly are non-lethal methods of discipline, defense, etc. Thus, the entire point of the article. And it snarls. In fact, laws have improved safety in our society quite a bit. If you are really concerned about our children, please do some research into what has proved effective. Most people want gun regulations. Guy used the same easily accessible semi auto rifle the pulse shooter used. Could have bought it at Wal-Mart with a lisence, a gun show without a licence or secretly from a some guy.
There is no proper oversite. Have you seen how many kids have been shot in their own homes when guns were carelessly left sitting around? Some of those schools are also greatly threatened by silicone dildos. Those schools also have problems with burglery, rape and sometimes murder.
The no gun zone campuses are more for student to student safty. Everyone should own a gun and everyone should expect to be treated equally in open carry states under the law. How many African-Americans have been murdered for legally carrying? Or appearing to be? Where was the nra when that guy was murdered by cops in his car for legally carrying in an open carry state? Or the guy that was murdered by police for legally buying an airsoft rifle? Or the decades long imprisonment of a black florida woman for shooting 2 rounds inside her home when someone tried to assault her?
But more to the point. The proposed action was not to use these deterrents but to put more guns in schools, more guards or armed teachers. Guns arent being made illegal. If gun owners continue to purchase guns after gun regulations are put into place they are no better than the criminals they say will illegally purchase weapons after gun laws are put into place. If anything, this threat of not following regulation would keep gun markets open for the next mass shooter to purchase weapons. WHY should schools and other buildings have to be turned into prisons just so the white males in this country can all keep their stash of guns?
I am a white male, and I do not own a gun. In fact I have more female friends and acquaintances that own guns then male friends who do. If someone opens a door you would have them on tape. The standard you set would have to be followed without exceptions. Teachers could teach without being strapped down. An ounce of prevention is worth way more than a ton of untrained cure in our schools. Taking certain weapons out of circulation or making them much more difficult to obtain and own will save lives. There is literally an entire library of data confirming this to be true.
I appreciate your insight and agree that arming teachers is not the answer. Yet I would be willing to bett many retired vets would donate their time to 1st and gaurd and spend time watching and protecting schools if just asked.
Are people to lazy or scared to ask thwm? How many of these shooting have stopped just because the cowardly gunman thought they were in danger themselves because they heard just ONE shot the thought might be coming their way??? Prior service military and police would line up ten deep to save children. The NRA should offer free gun safety programs to anyone who wants one for free.
For me, the idea that arming teachers could be considered a satisfactory response is just asinine. Most anything worthwhile involves sacrifice. What is truly asinine is to allow schools to remain gun free zones. Martin and others have no right to judge the potential future actions of others. Stick to predicting lottery numbers; you will have more luck. What is truly asinine—and deadly—is allowing weapons designed for maximum lethality loose among our civilian population. They are lousy for home defense—shotguns and pistols with ammunition not designed to penetrate walls and continue through a neighborhood are far more useful and far less likely to maim the family three houses down, so if you think need an AR for defense, you are too stupid to use any gun, ever.
Hunters are better off with accurate rifles that hold four rounds or fewer, or, depending on the game, with shotguns. Who the hell needs 30 round magazines to take down game? If you want an AR because you think you will need it when the government comes for you, I have no sympathy for you whatever, and you should consider moving to a country whose government suits you better. Because, clearly, more guns has always solved the problem. Oh wait. Every year there are more guns in the hands of the public and the amount of mass shootings keeps increasing. Sweden has a much lower violent crime rate than the US.
At what point are you finally going to say NO to people like this? And, despite the looks of responses here, your views are in the minority. How about we try to prevent school shootings—and all mass shootings—in the first place? Obviously you are OK with accepting that such things will continue to happen. Most Americans are not. But do you know that for sure? Have YOU ever been in a fire fight? More guns are NOT the answer. Better yet, just do the latter. It is better than doing nothing. Typical government. Put up or shut up. The author, being ex military and combat experienced, should understand that better than most civilians.
Actually they had been to his house repeatedly. There are factions that wants you to believe the FBI and other law enforcement agencies are ineffective. They work very hard and risk their lives every day. Every other country has all sorts of people with mental health issues, and all sorts of people who can be potentially violent. Only America has frequent mass shootings and school shootings. America is on the way to being a failed state — thr only developed nation to hold that distinction. Good luck! Sgt: Thank you for your service, but your argument is disengenuous. Moreover, you were ambushed.
You did not know the terrain or layout. I suspect you had not cleared the dwellings — or, at the very least, know the layout as well as a teacher would know the layout of his school. Waiting for law enforcement in these situations is nothing more than allowing a greater body count. Indeed, the shooter in this recent shootin gwas over and done and walked out right past the cops rushing in. Properly rushed, a gunman would have no chance of continuing his carnage. Would some kids get killed? But kids were already getting killed and injured while few rushed him and many ran and hid.
In closing, let me share one discussion of a really good friend of mine from the high school I graduated from. That school had all of kids — — and we know if someone came on campus with such intent, we sure as hell would have gone after him. And you are an expert in the marksmanship of police officers in what verified capacity? I suspect Bob has a valid point. I hope a CMPD patrolman will inform us what recurring firearms training they must successfully accomplish on a annual basis. Frequent firearms practice is paramount.
Gary: Wanna be scared? I know one cop, in a town near me, who carries a wheel gun. For those out of the know, look that one up. And the leather has actually fused to the weapon. But he does keep the exposed port portions clean and shiny. And, by the way, yes, there are old, live rounds still in each chamber. I tried to leave a response yesterday but for some reason, it has not appeared. For the last 20 years, I have supplied forced entry equipment and training to law enforcement and other first responders via Fenrir.
Perhaps it was my URL that bounced the posting. Does that make me expert? Does that make me qualified to comment? But it does make me confident in my reply. Self defense is a personal right. Use it, or, lose it. And, by the way, an element of Self-defense includes defense of others. Hell, I knew one officer in a town near me who has never withdrawn his wheel gun from its holster. But he keeps the exposed parts really shiny. And, Yes — there is an old, live round in each cylinder. And, when he goes for his annual, or bi-annual range re-qualification — he actually borrows a Glock from a fellow officer.
Now, folks, one last point: That very infrequent range re-qual for most cops is them sitting at a counter shooting paper down range. It does NOT necessarily include any simulation for a real-life, active shooter. And, to drive that point home — remember, Majory Stoneman Douglas was trying to schedule an active shooter drill. No practice there, folks. I just heard one district that has it in place where the weapons are locked.
Short of that, I like the idea of secured doorways. Not that beats an armed response. So, still thanks Mr. Martin for his service. God Bless him always. But I also still disagree with his thesis. Of the remaining teachers, how many are really going to be that diligent about training? Now, say you do have armed teachers in a school. Almost all the deaths in this shooting and most others occurred in the first minute or two after Cruz started shooting.
How do you propose that the volunteer weapons handling teachers run out of their classrooms abandoning those students! There are not one-room school-houses. In the chaos, the armed teachers would be very lucky to identify the shooter correctly and then, in that chaotic environment, what are the odd of a clear shot? I have researched police training levels nationally.
Based on reports of surveys of police training academies, recruits receive on average 70 hours of firearms training, with most of the firing being at static targets, although some moving target-moving shooter training is done by many academies. Continuing firearms training looks to be about twice a year for a total of 15 hours on average. But that is only when police department budgets are good. When budgets get cut, ongoing training is one of the first areas that get reduced. Some do it only once every two years. Officers assigned to SWAT type units seem to do a lot more official formal training than the general police patrol officers.
As Sgt. Martin states, that level of training is not adequate to be effective. It is just the minimum to keep up appearances of being qualified. I think many police officers do additional firearms training on their own, but that is time consuming and expensive for the officers. No way to know how many do the extra training or how effective their training programs are.
If it is simply firing more rounds at static targets, it would not be that effective. I have spent 2 decades at Fenrir Industries. That is a ridiculous thing to say, Bob. How dare you. Your response has me so furious that my fingers are shaking while I write this response. I am sorry to say that I feel that until guns themselves have been outlawed, these types of massacres will never end.
Seriously, Bob? How dare you suggest kids fight back rather than be slaughtered like cattle, bob. How dare you bring up the fact that most police officers are not as well trained as people think, bob. You should be placed into an immediate re-education center. THEY have no problem at all wasting anybody they want, man woman child, on every part of the earth outside this country, in order to get whatever it is they want… that they believe more valuable than foreign human lubes…like oil, gold, poppies. You really think the Govt here cares about a few kids? I assure u they do not.
Matt, Thanks for serving, and for the pain you endured for all Americans. As a fellow Vet, I concur with your article, with one exception. A Vet such as yourself has the maturity and experience to carry and defend your students. That is exactly what the Israelis did and have no problem with their schools. After all, the people who commit these crimes generally know where the security is, and whether it is going to be able to respond in time. As you probably know as well, Matt, that officer is probably also not the very best one they have on the force.
In Florida, it was one armed person, who may or may not even have been on campus, depending upon which report you read. In fact, as that one teacher said, he thought only the mentally slow or dimwits went into the military…something you and I could easily refute, but he doubled down when challenged. Suspect he feels the same way about cops…except when he needs one. A civilian businessman does not just throw money at a problem if he wants to be successful. He figures out what needs to be done, tests it, makes sure the solution works and is both affordable and able to be done.
Only then does he implement it fully. We call that the scientific method. In government, we pass a law, throw money at it and declare the problem solved. Then add more laws, more money, ad infinitum. There is no measure of effectiveness and no feedback whether something works, even though the public may rapidly know something is all fouled up.
This is x as bad as the shooting. We need to figure out what measures of school security work, what we can afford, and test those measures, adjusting as necessary. The founding fathers were sensitive to how quickly a free society could be taken over by tyranny. That is why the Constitution and amendments. Somewhere in South Florida there are hundreds or even dozens of kids who might wonder if they had also said something about the U tube, Instagram and Facebook posts, if maybe the FBI or other law enforcement MIGHT have done more, rather than just the two who did and were somewhat ignored.
Many schools and MOST urban schools already have a limited number of unlocked entrances with metal detectors and armed guards at the usually single unlocked entrance that must be used to enter the school during the school day. Perhaps the first thing to do is for Congress to repeal the law that prohibits the CDC from studying gun violence as a public health problem and start funding real research into gun violence and gun safety. Yes, if a person is set on the killing they will find something else to use.
But why not take away the ones that kill the most people quickly? And saying the rest of your constitutional rights would be under fire next does not hold water. Look how many people have died and yet any amendments to the second amendment are still ridiculously difficult to get passed. Thank you for your service. I understand your concerns and appreciate the clarity with which you express them. But the current alternative — other than providing professional armed security — is to leave both teachers and students as defenseless human targets for mad men and lunatics.
And it must be said: These individual school shooters, at least historically, have been as inexperienced at shooting as many of the teachers themselves would be.
The Texas commander
Many teachers are also military or law enforcement veterans. And we a speaking of a different real-time scenario than that of a military battlefield where there are multiple enemies — shooters with fully automatic AKs — who are frequently behind barriers of various kinds. Some possibility of resistance and self defense is preferable for our schools even if less than perfect. Further, you mention police who are supposedly highly trained and still have a high incidence of being shot. That example seems to be valid at first glance, but that analogy should be probed.
Many police academies only require forty hours of firearms training with the actual police departments only requiring semi-annual or annual firearms qualification. Better would be the DEA which provides hours of training. Or the FBI firearm and tactical training. Money spent paying teachers for hours of firearm and tactical training in the Summer by the DEA or FBI would be money amazingly well spent. I would suggest they get extra pay if they carry during the academic year.
I was from the Vietnam War era. The firearms training for military draftees then does not even come close to what is available today. That would be infinitely better than the status quo. The OP is trying to illustrate the actuality of what happens in a real time fight-or-flight physiologic response in a real time event of having your life threatened. Training shows you how to pull a trigger.
Training civilian teachers to pull a trigger on a student or juvenile is the most horrendous thing from an organic stance. Anyone who still thinks teachers should be armed, I ask you additional question: how do you think schools would pay for it? The guns themselves, the ammo, the training, the insurance, etc. Do you realize how astronomical the cost would be?
Do you realize how many schools there are, and how many teachers work at each school? What about substitute teachers? Ok fine, that turned into a bunch of questions. But none that anyone can answer legitimately. More guns in schools does not equal more safety. Sometimes you throw shit at the wall and hope it sticks. God help us if this one sticks.
Your lack of basic logic is what is terribly laughable. You poor little man. Consider that not everything is an issue of liberals and conservatives… some issues are just about human beings. As it is, we parents have to buy the freaking pencils and paper for our classrooms every year.
Thank you for your for your service. The courage you display performing your duty to our country is something we should all aspire too. Having said that, an active shooter situation is not the same as a firefight in a war zone. While they are both stressful situations and the human physiological and psychological reactions will have similarities, your experience in one does not transfer to expertise in the other.
First, we know that some teachers do run toward gunfire. Accounts from Sandy Hook, Parkland, and numerous other school shootings tell of teachers moving to the shooter. Principal Dawn Hochsprung and Mary Sherlach were the first to fall at Sandy Hook as they confronted the shooter, unarmed. Scott Beigel and Aaron Feis both died at Parkland because they put themselves between the shooter and their students, again unarmed.
Would teachers, who demonstrated a willingness to run towards gunfire to defend their students, not have been better served by having a firearm to defend themselves and their students? You also ignore the school shooting that have been stopped by armed students and teachers. Waiting for the police means more people dead. Guns are used defensively thousands of times a year and in the vast majority of cases it is the perpetrator who is shoot. I cannot remember a single case of an innocent being shoot despite having read hundreds of cases of defensive gun use.
In the vast majority cases, school shooters surrender or kill themselves when confronted with armed resistance. The other factor is that almost all mass shootings take place in gun free zones, such as schools. Mass shooters are cowards and they want easy victims. If they know that schools will present armed resistance they will not even try. Do you know that there are already armed teachers in the country? Colorado, Utah, and Ohio are among the states that now allow armed teachers.
So far no problems and no shootings. There is another country that had a school shooting problem worse than ours. Israel had to deal, not with disaffected youths, but determined terrorists. Their solution, arm the teachers. The results, a dramatic drop in school shootings, and hundreds a saved lives.
So, Mr Martin, while I honor your service, your experience does not illuminate this situation. The empirical data shows arming teachers to be an effective deterrent and a way to reduce casualties, despite your feelign to the contrary. For many reasons, arming teachers is utter insanity. One, is the cost. And you want the property owners to be burdened with additional taxes to turn our schools into virtual prisons??
Trump and his republican Congressional buddies want to drastically cut our domestic programs. So you can count federal funding out. Most states have stretched-to-the-max funding issues. Check them off your list. Last funding suggestion: Have the gun-loving NRA pay for all the costs, including the guns, the cc permits, AND all the specialized training.
No thoughts of prevention. False equivalence. There was an armed security guard in Parkland, and we all know how well your fantasy of more guns resulting in less gun violence worked out there. I appreciate your service and insight. The solution is out of the box thinking. Not every teacher would be trained. Guns would not be holstered and walked around the school. Any other time they would be safely hidden and locked unknown to students. Reaction is uncontrollable.
But many civilizations have reacted appropriately and bravely in the face of danger. By your own static, more than half are possitive outcomes. There is danger and risk. But in a dangerous situation, stopping the situation is a risk many teachers would be willing to face. Experience happens when you actually have demonstrated under pressure and learning how to master your reactions and ability to effectively strategize without compromising your stance or your teams.
Related Trained to Kill (Keller County Cops Book 6)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved