Local High School here in Indiana with security all schools should have.

theetommyt

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2012
1,242
1,465
113
Arming teachers is a bad idea for a multitude of reasons, even if there were few who had guns, were highly trained, and were close enough to the attacker, the statistics of armed and trained individuals actually hitting the target are not good. The chances of that armed and trained teacher hitting someone may also be unacceptable and create chaos.

From the article linked:

New York City police statistics show that simply hitting a target, let alone hitting it in a specific spot, is a difficult challenge. In 2006, in cases where police officers intentionally fired a gun at a person, they discharged 364 bullets and hit their target 103 times, for a hit rate of 28.3 percent, according to the department’s Firearms Discharge Report. The police shot and killed 13 people last year.

In 2005, officers fired 472 times in the same circumstances, hitting their mark 82 times, for a 17.4 percent hit rate. They shot and killed nine people that year.

In all shootings — including those against people, animals and in suicides and other situations — New York City officers achieved a 34 percent accuracy rate (182 out of 540), and a 43 percent accuracy rate when the target ranged from zero to six feet away. Nearly half the shots they fired last year were within that distance.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html


These are trained professionals, trained for these situations as a primary function of their occupation. They are hitting consistently less than 1/3 of their targets and less than half at close range. Arming teachers is treating the last possible symptom of the problem, not addressing the actual problem. It's taking a cough drop for pneumonia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big_Blue79

TheDude1

Well-Known Member
Apr 15, 2010
4,612
4,330
113
Not sure where to start. I teach in an urban high school. We have 4-5 SROs on duty everyday. I feel none the safer. They aren’t the most competent bunch which is I’m sure what they’d be like most places, if we started placing them at every school in America.

And what’s this about teaching the kids to rush the shooter? Lol. Admit it, you just made that shit up @TheDude1.

If kids want to shoot up schools, it will happen. We can take step to make schools safer, but if they wanna come guns blazing, there isn’t much we can do about it. Arming teachers is just stupid, not even worth commenting on.

Hah! No, not made up. The most popular one is ALICE training, and it is a fairly accepted thing. It is certainly an interesting approach, but I'm not sure it's ever been in a school that's been through a shooting.

https://www.alicetraining.com/


http://www.businessinsider.com/teachers-students-alice-fight-defend-school-mass-shooters

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/10/can-your-child-learn-to-defeat-a-school-shooter.html
 

hailtoyourvictor

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2012
32,408
22,712
113
Our active shooter policy is pretty crazy. If we can’t escape, we baracade a room, but if we can escape we aren’t suppose to stall the escape by securing our patient or helping them out with us. The thought of leaving a bed ridden patient in my exam room while I run out the closest exit to safety is a bit unsettling.
 

coryfly

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2007
45,974
6,925
113
Our active shooter policy is pretty crazy. If we can’t escape, we baracade a room, but if we can escape we aren’t suppose to stall the escape by securing our patient or helping them out with us. The thought of leaving a bed ridden patient in my exam room while I run out the closest exit to safety is a bit unsettling.

Is the mindset that they are less likely to shoot someone who is already a patient or simply a polity to ensure employees are safe?
 

TheDude1

Well-Known Member
Apr 15, 2010
4,612
4,330
113
Btw, notice this has been a pretty civil, balanced convo? No insults or personal attacks or anything.

Go us.
 
Last edited:

hailtoyourvictor

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2012
32,408
22,712
113
Is the mindset that they are less likely to shoot someone who is already a patient or simply a polity to ensure employees are safe?

There are a few reasons.

-Active shooters are more likely interested in targeting employees

-It’s a life or death situation and employees shouldn’t feel forced to risk death when an escape is possible.

-If the shooter was going to take assault on that room, 1 victim is better than 2.

-In a mass casualty event, the number of on scene health care employees available to provide care is critical. Risking death by not escaping means you won’t be able to provide care for survivors once the threat is neutralized.



And it makes enough, sense to me that I’d probably lock my patient in the room on my way out and find an exit if possible, but it is a terribly hard ethical situation to come to terms with.


I feel like we could never have an active shooter drill because this would be a PR nightmare with patients saying “they would just leave me!”.
 

TheDude1

Well-Known Member
Apr 15, 2010
4,612
4,330
113
My first kid just came in with a bulletproof backpack.

My, what times we live in.
 

TheDude1

Well-Known Member
Apr 15, 2010
4,612
4,330
113
School a few towns over had a real lockdown yesterday; kid threatened to shoot up the school, they locked down for four hours, SWAT all over the place. We then had our first lockdown drill since Florida today. The kids were SO damn anxious. The one who got the bulletproof backpack sort of discreetly got behind it. I had to sort of remind them "Guys, its just a drill; you can hear the custodian in the hall. No worries."
 

Toast.

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
May 10, 2011
10,106
4,204
113
Denver
School a few towns over had a real lockdown yesterday; kid threatened to shoot up the school, they locked down for four hours, SWAT all over the place. We then had our first lockdown drill since Florida today. The kids were SO damn anxious. The one who got the bulletproof backpack sort of discreetly got behind it. I had to sort of remind them "Guys, its just a drill; you can hear the custodian in the hall. No worries."
I personally think the armed teacher stuff is a very bad idea that doesn't get to the root of the problem, but don't need to go into details of my opinion.

But one thing I'm curious about: would you mind sharing what teachers are trained to do currently in lockdown, active shooter siutations? I assume their responsibility is to get their room locked down and students in the safest spot in their room.

With that said, I'm just wondering how an armed teacher would then offer any help outside of potentially keeping a shooter out of their room. It doesn't seem like them leaving their students or opening the door to their room is a good idea in the slightest.
 

Big_Blue79

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2004
5,737
1,035
113
Arming teachers is a bad idea for a multitude of reasons

It's in the running for worst idea of 2018. And the 2010s. And the century. I'm frankly surprised that people are advocating for arming the secret communists indoctrinating our children to become passive socialists that embrace the teachings of the NWO, but it's crazy times we live in.

Btw, notice this has been a pretty civil, balanced convo? No insults or personal attacks or anything.

Go us.

I wonder if UNC's fake professors for their fake classes will be armed, if the athletes "enrolled" in those fake classes just bum rush the shooter (Julius Peppers is a bad, bad man!), or if the NCAA will clear UNC if everyone has an opportunity to be shot? Also Bill Self chokes, and Iowa sucks or something?

In all seriousness, I was generally impressed by this board during all the offseason stuff (with exceptions, of course), and it's refreshing to see a corner of the internet where people aren't dicks. Go y'all (I'm not a regular yet).
 

TheDude1

Well-Known Member
Apr 15, 2010
4,612
4,330
113
I personally think the armed teacher stuff is a very bad idea that doesn't get to the root of the problem, but don't need to go into details of my opinion.

But one thing I'm curious about: would you mind sharing what teachers are trained to do currently in lockdown, active shooter siutations? I assume their responsibility is to get their room locked down and students in the safest spot in their room.

With that said, I'm just wondering how an armed teacher would then offer any help outside of potentially keeping a shooter out of their room. It doesn't seem like them leaving their students or opening the door to their room is a good idea in the slightest.

As of right now most districts have the teachers first do a sweep of the hall; you grab any kid you see, although you do keep track, with the idea that you might be sweeping a suspect who has ditched a weapon into the room.

Then you shut off the lights and get the kids in the corner that is not visible from the door (most school doors have a smaller sized window) and you wait. All doors are locked all the time, so... I guess that, over time, they've found that shooters usually move on from a locked door.

There is a certain amount of "you are on your own" to it. The police are very clear; you are in the situation, and if you feel you should do something (or not do something) you do it. I've always had my own sort of "plan" for if it happened. In my old room, which was right at the end of the school and looked into some dense woods, it was always going to be an "out the window and scatter into the woods" thing. Now I figure I'd have to get some barricades in front of the door; desks and shelves that are right there, but done somewhat quietly.... don't want to draw attention.

Yeah, in terms of teachers engaging a shooter, I suppose select teachers would immediately move out and begin some sort of coordinated sweep? The amount of training it would require would be significant, both individually but also in terms of moving/acting in a coordinated fashion. Trying to get a bunch of teachers to slice the pie would be an experience. And that would likely leave kids without an adult. There obviously hasn't been a ton of in depth thought put into this yet.

There are some other teachers here who can chime in; other places might have slightly different protocols.
 
Last edited:

lurkeraspect84

Well-Known Member
Mar 4, 2014
39,432
42,910
113
Memphis
Team
Kentucky

I am stupid

Well-Known Member
Mar 18, 2013
4,032
1,560
113
Do you know all know what the majority of mass shooters do when they are confronted by an armed person or a person who will put up a fight?

They give up.

I'm not saying arming teachers is the right thing to do(i'm against it), but sitting in a corner waiting to be shot is a bad move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SNU0821

I am stupid

Well-Known Member
Mar 18, 2013
4,032
1,560
113
Interesting piece from The Atlantic by one of the doctors who tried to treat victims from Florida, who has experience with other mass shootings. Amazing the different that a high muzzle velocity weapon like an AR does compared to a handgun.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...land-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

Interesting, but if you read military reports a lot of soldiers think the 5.56 is too weak and small because they can hit people several times and they just run away.

Is it stronger than a small pistol? Of course, but a 5.56 is nothing special in ballistics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SNU0821

TheDude1

Well-Known Member
Apr 15, 2010
4,612
4,330
113
Cool. No need to make anything personal, I just read the article and understood her point the first time she said it. Then the second, third etc.

Not really making it personal... but when you read a first hand account from a doctor who responded to several mass shootings and you take the time to say it is a brutal read, and then to point out that it wasn't the horrible descriptions of what bullets do to the human body but rather the lack of brevity that made it brutal... it seems a bit much?

Do you know all know what the majority of mass shooters do when they are confronted by an armed person or a person who will put up a fight?

They give up.

I'm not saying arming teachers is the right thing to do(i'm against it), but sitting in a corner waiting to be shot is a bad move.

Not sure what the solution is. People with more experience than I have seem to say sitting in a corner is exactly what works best, all things considered, in to keep people alive.

As far as what a shooter does... Im not sure that you are correct, about shooters giving up when someone puts up a fight. We have no idea how many victims may have charged the shooter or attempted to stop the shooter, only to get shot. As for encountering armed resistance, the vast majority of the time, the person they encounter is someone who is NOT part of their original target, right? But someone like law enforcement? Could be that the drive to destroy one target goes away not when challenged, but when confronted by a not-original-target? You know... like, a kid who is shooting up a school because he was bullied isn't driven to shoot a cop on the same insane way? Dunno.

Interesting, but if you read military reports a lot of soldiers think the 5.56 is too weak and small because they can hit people several times and they just run away.

Is it stronger than a small pistol? Of course, but a 5.56 is nothing special in ballistics.

Yeah, the debate over 7.62 or another replacement heavier round vs 5.56 is a common one, both the pros and cons of it (recoil, damage, arc, weight, etc). But I think maybe the fact that we are discussing military issues, such as lethality at 500 meters plus, when discussing civilian firearms might be an indication that something isn't quite right.
 

lurkeraspect84

Well-Known Member
Mar 4, 2014
39,432
42,910
113
Memphis
Team
Kentucky
Not really making it personal... but when you read a first hand account from a doctor who responded to several mass shootings and you take the time to say it is a brutal read, and then to point out that it wasn't the horrible descriptions of what bullets do to the human body but rather the lack of brevity that made it brutal... it seems a bit much?


.

Geez dude, I just said writing isn't her forte.
 

theetommyt

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2012
1,242
1,465
113
Do you know all know what the majority of mass shooters do when they are confronted by an armed person or a person who will put up a fight?

They give up.

I'm not saying arming teachers is the right thing to do(i'm against it), but sitting in a corner waiting to be shot is a bad move.
Not saying you're wrong, but can you back that up with more than anecdotal evidence?
 

SNU0821

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2013
9,151
3,047
113
I don't think just sitting and waiting in a room while a gunman is roaming the halls is the best approach to keeping kids safe.

I also don't think everyone here understands that when the concept of arming teachers is brought up, it's not talking about giving each teacher a gun and calling it a day. They're talking about asking for volunteers, having them go through extensive training, and being another layer of defense in the event of a shooter. There are schools in Texas, Ohio and others that already have teachers that are armed. There haven't been any adverse issues yet, in fact, if you ask the students they claim they feel safer.

I'm not saying it's the right answer, but it 100% should be considered and looked into more. I do think we need to improve school safety (entrances, etc.) and look at additional SRO's and other types of security guards. We live in a different time, now. It's unfortunate that we have to think about these things, but it's reality. We protect all sorts of things in our lives with security guards. Why not our children?
 

ThroughBlue

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2005
9,682
1,282
113
Set a mandatory security officer Per so many students. I graduated with 60 kids in my class and only 300 for the whole school. One security officer would be enough for my old high school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SNU0821