Arm the teachers

Page 3 of 6 [ 93 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

19 Dec 2012, 7:26 pm

Dillogic wrote:

eric76 wrote:

As I understand it, many states, but by no means all states, require a minimum amount of training for security guards. The training, when it is required, can often be completed in something like one to three days.

It depends on the actual security job though. An unarmed individual walking around a high dollar clothing store doesn't need much training in comparison to an armored car guard. The latter can have training equal or greater to a standard police officer regarding employment of defensive measures, for example.

An armed car guard may have some additional training, but nothing anything close to that of a city, county, state, or federal law enforcement officer.

CyborgUprising
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,963
Location: auf der Fahrt durch Niemandsland

19 Dec 2012, 7:26 pm

Dillogic wrote:

It's immaterial, and also illogical to assume that armed adults will go off the deep end for the simple reason of being armed when it's likely that they'll go off the deep end anyway with their private arms if they're predisposed to this.

Police often don't (nearly all cases), and they're no more of sound mind than other state or federal employees (such as teachers) in regards to requirements to be one.

Did I ever state that merely being armed made someone go "off the deep end" anywhere in my comments?
I said that it is totally within the realm of possibility for a teacher to shoot a student for being disruptive (and not constituting a threat to the students and staff). I am not pro-gun or anti-gun: I just don't think teachers should be armed. As for being able to know if a teacher is inching towards the "deep end" all I can say is that hasn't stopped students from killing each other despite the fact that people have known for a while that the perpetrator wasn't "right" mentally. Simply because someone knows someone is crazy, doesn't mean they will want to/be able to do anything about it.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

19 Dec 2012, 7:31 pm

Just a little web search finds this regarding the requirements for armored car guards in New York.

http://www.labor.ny.gov/stats/olcny/armored-car-guard.shtm wrote:

Training Requirements

Armored car guards are required to complete two training programs approved by the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS): (1) a 47-hour firearms course, and (2) an annual, 8-hour, firearms self-development course.

...

Continuing Education Requirements

24 hours of DOS-approved continuing education that must be completed within their two-year license period.

That's it. 47 hour firearms course and 8 hours of a firearms self-development course. And then 24 hours of continuing education over two years.

CuriousKitten
Velociraptor

Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Age: 65
Gender: Female
Posts: 487
Location: Deep South USA

19 Dec 2012, 7:56 pm

Mike1 wrote:

There's always the possibility that one of those teachers could snap and start killing students. Only one of them would have to snap, and a number of kids would be killed before anyone would be able to get there to stop them. I wouldn't suggest arming teachers with lethal weapons, but maybe tranquilizer dart guns.

People don't just snap out of the blue.

There have been many other shootings that didn't make the news because the shooter was stopped before the body count got high enough to interest the national news folk. What stopped the shooter? a principle, teacher or neighbor with a gun!

imho: all schools should have at least one person who is armed and able to stop a shooter. If the budget does not include trained security guards, then train the teachers.

_________________
If it don't come easy . . . .
. . . .hack it until it works right :-)

Aspie score: 142/200 NT score: 64/200
AQ Score: 42
BAP: 109 aloof, 94 rigid and 85 pragmatic

cammyyy
Sea Gull

Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 200
Location: Ontario

19 Dec 2012, 10:19 pm

What an American solution. More guns aren't going to fix this issue.

Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

19 Dec 2012, 10:36 pm

eric76 wrote:

That's it. 47 hour firearms course and 8 hours of a firearms self-development course. And then 24 hours of continuing education over two years.

A 47 hour firearm course is actually quite a lot of time devoted to that one single thing. You can generally teach someone the basics of safe shooting and get them going in 30 minutes; 47 hours could devote a lot of time to procedures and tactics.

The continuing training could mean 1 hour of range time a month (with some basic theory reiterated).

I bet this isn't far from basic* police officers.

*I've found that various state police agencies have firearms training from 30 to 100 hours during the academy. So, 47 is within that nicely

Besides, you can always provide more training for these individuals who would be stationed at schools (I'd definitely make them have a range session weekly). It shouldn't be hard to fund a couple per school if every parent puts in a small amount of money a year, and that'd be the worst case scenario; there's no reason why it can't be funded by local councils to state governments. Security guards don't earn that much money.

Naturally, I bet this won't be implemented, even though it's the only real thing that'll help against these things. It's a better alternative to armed teachers (though I don't see why that can't be an individual choice).

Last edited by Dillogic on 19 Dec 2012, 10:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Toy_Soldier
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,370

19 Dec 2012, 10:43 pm

cammyyy wrote:

What an American solution. More guns aren't going to fix this issue.

I do see your point. It is the same in the large scale as in the small scale. But schools have become the target of choice for crazies and in some cases extremists (ie The school massacre in Russia), and its because they shock people the most and are very soft/easy targets.

So against that real threat we have to react to protect our children and in the short to middle run I think only armed guards will help. I think regular cops are the way to go, as they are certainly trained to a high standard and fully intergrated with the police force for smoothest communication and coordination.

Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

19 Dec 2012, 10:47 pm

Police would work too, of course (though I think people are unfairly biased against security personal).

A shopping center ("mall") I went to when I lived in the suburbs had a two man police station attached to it. It's still there. As are security guards. The police are always walking around inside it. They'd be able to respond to an active threat quickly.

ianorlin
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 756

19 Dec 2012, 10:56 pm

Also what happens if a teacher loses the gun and and a student takes it from the teacher? I wouldn't trust someone who steals a teachers gun to not do something stupid. Or someone stabs teacher takes gun starts shooting people.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

19 Dec 2012, 11:15 pm

Dillogic wrote:

eric76 wrote:

That's it. 47 hour firearms course and 8 hours of a firearms self-development course. And then 24 hours of continuing education over two years.

Huh!

Let's see. In New York, it is 47 hours on the firing range and 8 hours in the class for a armored car guard (and that's more training than for a simple security guard). And you think that isn't far from the basics for police officers?

Would you believe 639 hours for just the basics for police officers in New York?

http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us/ops/training/bcpo/bcpo01.htm wrote:

The Basic Course for Police Officers has undergone a continual evolution since it was first established. ... and November 5, 2008 - 639 hours.

639 hours vs 55 hours. Not that far apart?

cammyyy
Sea Gull

Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 200
Location: Ontario

19 Dec 2012, 11:38 pm

ianorlin wrote:

Or the teacher goes nuts and starts killing people. Bound to happen if people decide to arm them.

Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

19 Dec 2012, 11:46 pm

eric76 wrote:

Would you believe 639 hours for just the basics for police officers in New York?

The majority of that 639 hours doesn't actually include firearms training though. Most of it is criminology and policing.

Like as I posted, some police academies will include 30 to 100 hours of firearms training in addition to the rest of the course, which all adds up. Some listed the breakdown, i.e., 70 hours firearms, 100 hours criminal law, 50 hours social policing, blah and blah (the numbers are made up there but they go along similar lines).

cammyyy,

There's nothing saying that a teacher wouldn't do these things anyway, whether they carried a firearm or not. To carry a firearm legally, one needs to be a responsible citizen free of any serious offenses (this is the US), such in the same way to become a police officer. Police seem to handle it well enough, and there's a lot of them. How many police have you seen lose it in public? In fact, how many civilians have you seen lose it in public with a firearm? None.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

19 Dec 2012, 11:58 pm

Dillogic wrote:

eric76 wrote:

Would you believe 639 hours for just the basics for police officers in New York?

The majority of that 639 hours doesn't actually include firearms training though. Most of it is criminology and policing.[

Of course. Don't you understand that that is by far the most important part of the job?

Dillogic wrote:

Like as I posted, some police academies will include 30 to 100 hours of firearms training in addition to the rest of the course, which all adds up. Some listed the breakdown, i.e., 70 hours firearms, 100 hours criminal law, 50 hours social policing, blah and blah (the numbers are made up there but they go along similar lines).

Why are you so fixated on the shooting part of the job? If you want to put a bunch of armed bozos in a school who's entire training is in shooting, you are going to have some serious incidents.

Knowing when not to shoot is far more important than when to shoot.

Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

20 Dec 2012, 12:12 am

eric76 wrote:

Knowing when not to shoot is far more important than when to shoot.

That's usually a part of firearms training; the correct application of force and what constitutes self-defense. If you check out your local criminal code, the portion on self-defense is only a tiny part of it (literally a page out of hundreds).

An armed guard doesn't need to know about most of the criminal justice system and how it all works, just how to guard whatever it is that they're guarding as appropriate to certain portions of the criminal code and other relevant civil acts. The police are the ones who actually apprehend people after they've committed the crime (that's generally their job rather than self-defense, but they do also provide that); said apprehension based on the aforementioned criminal code. The police need to know the entire criminal code and other acts and how to apply it; that's why it's 700 hours (a small portion of that being firearms which includes appropriate use of force).

You can always rewrite stuff though if you implement security personal to schools. Or as I said, the police. It's erroneous to assume that the police will be any more qualified in this specific job though.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

20 Dec 2012, 12:45 am

Dillogic wrote:

eric76 wrote:

Knowing when not to shoot is far more important than when to shoot.

Understanding that portion is not so simple. Not only is the criminal code important, but so are the court cases that interpret that code. If all you know is a few simple portions from the code, then you don't know much.

Quote:

An armed guard doesn't need to know about most of the criminal justice system and how it all works, just how to guard whatever it is that they're guarding as appropriate to certain portions of the criminal code and other relevant civil acts. The police are the ones who actually apprehend people after they've committed the crime (that's generally their job rather than self-defense, but they do also provide that); said apprehension based on the aforementioned criminal code. The police need to know the entire criminal code and other acts and how to apply it; that's why it's 700 hours (a small portion of that being firearms which includes appropriate use of force).

I suspect that the most important thing in being an armed security guard in a school would be to learn the dynamics involved and that isn't going to be taught in any course that concentrates on firearms. They would need to know what to look for -- what is a threat, what is not a threat, and how to deal with each. A school teacher would already be expected to know most of this -- a security guard wouldn't.

Furthermore, as security guards, they would be watching for far more than just someone coming in the doors with the intentions of shooting people. If you put a security guard in every school in the country, in the average year only a very small number would ever have to deal with potential shooting situations. All of them would be expected to deal with other more common situations.

Quote:

You can always rewrite stuff though if you implement security personal to schools. Or as I said, the police. It's erroneous to assume that the police will be any more qualified in this specific job though.

It is quite an easy assumption to make if you have met many security guards. A school would not be the right place for many of the security guards I've met in the past. And I've met a couple who probably shouldn't be permitted anywhere near a school, especially armed.

cammyyy
Sea Gull

Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 200
Location: Ontario

20 Dec 2012, 1:22 am

Dillogic wrote:

cammyyy,

There's nothing saying that a teacher wouldn't do these things anyway, whether they carried a firearm or not. To carry a firearm legally, one needs to be a responsible citizen free of any serious offenses (this is the US), such in the same way to become a police officer. Police seem to handle it well enough, and there's a lot of them. How many police have you seen lose it in public? In fact, how many civilians have you seen lose it in public with a firearm? None.

Police have to go through a plethora of tests and examinations to determine whether or not they're mentally capable of being officers, and when there are issues that arise there are (supposed to be, anyway) support systems in place. And you seriously haven't seen any civilians "lose it in public" with firearms? There are a number of cases where people have taken guns and started shooting up people randomly. Of course, I'm Canadian, we're a little more controlled, but it happens all the time in the US.

Page 3 of 6 [ 93 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

Arm the teachers Post Reply New Topic

Arm the teachers