A Preventative School Shooting Solution...Arm The Staff

And Teachers are trained to do these drills yet they get no extra pay for doing so.

Why should they get paid (outside of formal training and retraining) for being ready, able, and willing to protect students from an active shooter like they are in case there's a fire, earthquake, or some other emergency?

 

Those other emergencies do not require packin' a pistol and getting in a shoot out. Those other emergencies are not an attack by a gunman....and teachers DO try to protect students from a gunmen but shouldn't be required to act like the military or police.

A question: Who pays the millions and millions in lawsuits when a teacher shoots the wrong person?



The bottom line is: It is not so simple to just say, "Arm the staff"

 

Teachers have done what they can in the past and many paid for it with their lives because they had ZERO chance to protect themselves as they were sitting ducks, which YOU prefer them to be.

And no one "requires" any or all Teachers to be trained to carry a firearm.

Who the **** cares?

It's better than the millions and millions that have to pay out after a school shooting like they do today.

No one said it would be simple.

How to "arm the staff" has been spelled out in some detail.

 

With no answers to the consequences....

 

Is lifesaving “work” when it’s purely voluntary?

That’s what a vote is for.

Really.

The staff member pays for nothing.

Yes, I would.

Staff only, and only those who want it.

Depends on the topic.

Well now that wouldn’t be voluntary, now would it?

I am not suggesting that they be untrained.

It pleases me that I can make you laugh. But I’m not a Republican. Sorry.

It has been done.

Shall we offer them a bounty?

I would be more than happy to do it, and, like the teachers, I don’t work for free.

The school district pays. I’m just surprised... I’m talking about protecting children, and you’re worried about liability insurance.

... while eating a hot dog.

Ms Hastings, I enjoy interacting with you, and so I would never even THINK of giving you anything but the facts or my sincere opinion.

Seth

 

Foxhastings: """There are work[place shootings....would you protect your company like that for NO extra money....no sane person would...

ABOVE you just said ( bolded in blue )you'd protect our company for no extra money...

YES, because I, as a taxpayer, have to pay for the Teacher/cop's mistakes!!!...and think things through....I don't believe answers like "Arm the Staff" (which DOES fit on a bumper sticker) have been thought through...

Thank you for differentiating between facts and your opinion...

 

All you have is excuses for not doing anything to protect our school children.

There's that.

 

No, I have things we could do for school children to keep them safe from freaks with guns...like stricter gun control laws but I will NOT get into a debate on that....

 

And neither will Congress and you know it.

So your position is to do nothing.

Got it!

 

Best keep them free kill zones eh? 15 states already allow some version of it.

 

It’s already against the law to murder someone. How’s that working out?

 

Uh, DUH, I can't pass laws....and neither can you , we are stuck with Congress whether they do anything or not....you go do the rogue vigilante thing and see where that gets ya...

Have teachers totin' guns with NO laws to protect them and see how long that lasts or how effective it really is..

 

Just getting schools out of gun free status will considerably reduce what we saw last Friday if not totally.

You and your lib/prog gun-grabbing ilk FAIL to understand that.

 

If I worked at a company doing whatever my job was, getting paid to do it, and my employer offered all expenses paid firearms training, including the firearm and full pay during the training because I was willing to respond to a lethal threat at work, I would do that. I would need my expenses paid and that’s it.

Now on the other hand, if a school or company wanted me just to do security, they’d have to pay me.

Tell that to the parents. Liability insurance concerns outweigh the safety of their children.

A thousand pardons, but WHO did you say sounded like a Republican???

There’s rarely any difference between the two, but you’re very welcome.

 

Arm the staff.... that only means the teacher get shot first

 

And how do you come up with that decerebrate assessment?

 

If you can't figure it out then you are the decerebrate one in this conversation

 

Ya got nothing to back-up your bullshit.

Got it!

 

if teachers are armed.. gunmen shoots teacher... now the only armed person in the room is down. We'll give you the next 20 minutes to process that piece of information... obviously everything needs to be spelled out for you

 

They get shot anyway. The Columbine shooters killed a teacher. The Roseburg shooter killed the teacher first. The Sandy Hook shooter killed 6 adult staff members. The Parkland shooter killed 3 school staff members. All of them, of course, were unarmed.

 

yes and this way they get to be first

 

The Virginia Tech shooter killed 5 teachers ...

The shooters almost always take out the teachers. If they were armed, they would have a chance to fight back. Many of the teachers I listed were killed after they knew there was a shooter. If they had been armed they could have fought back, before the shooter just systematically found them and killed them.

 

armed guards is a better solution, because guns can be stolen (and will be stolen if not secured), which means you're going to have to carry.. on your person or lock it in a safe at school. Do you really want teachers in front of a classroom carrying by law? Because imagine one doesn't carry and a massacre occurs... now suddenly it was his/her fault for not carrying.. it opens a whole can of worms of who's to blame for the number of deaths.

 

Sooooooooo...

...you'd rather see a gunman going from classroom after classroom doing the same thing and wrackin' up the kid body count like this last gunman, the SH, Conn gunman., and the Va. Tech. gunman did?