# Arming teachers **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 16, 2018, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927 "2018-02-16T14:48:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/61 "2018-02-16T19:34:26Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > I feel like arming teachers would lead to more student deaths, more confused situations where someone “felt threatened”–possibly legitimately–so panicked and shot someone instead of deescalating the situation. Even if armed teachers reduced the body count at mass shootings (which I am not sure is the case), I think those deaths have to be taken as a meaningful offset. Part of my reasoning is that the teachers I know that want guns are the sort to feel threatened easily and to perceive what I see as youthful behavior as threatening and aggressive insolence. > > There’s also plenty of disgruntled teachers. The whole profession is recreationally disgruntled. I think the number of workplace shootings would also go up, just from opportunity. It doesn’t have to go up MUCH to offset any benefits. > [@Jasmine](#): > > Our school has a uniformed police officer on duty all day long every day. I think it far more preferable than paying a fortune to train a host of amateurs who might end up creating more chaos and harm than good. It’s truly astounding how you liberals never learn. The “streets full of blood” fear-mongering has been around for decades, and it has ALWAYS been proven false. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/62 "2018-02-16T19:40:49Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Yeah, I never claimed to have training regarding whatever precise scenario you want to craft your question around. That scenario would be an active shooter on school grounds. I know, silly to make sure that they are trained in the exact thing that you are arming them to be able to respond to. > [@puddleglum](#): > > This is a silly objection. There are several teachers in my family, they have to take CPR to be licensed, that does not mean they are paid more since they are now supposed to be doctors, they have recently taken training to spot abused kids, does that mean they are paid more since they are now supposed to be psychiatrists? > Just like the other trainings have not solved the problems of heart problems or sexual abuse but are an attempt to ameliorate the situation, gun training would not make teachers into security guards but might make school shooting somewhat less likely and less deadly. Do any of those involve killing or putting your life in danger? > [@Bone](#): > > It’s treading relatively untested grounds, so I’m not sure I can say what the right amount would be. I think if a state determines that an individual is suitable to carry based on its own criteria, I think the burden of showing why a school necessitates different treatment than say, a park or playground. But sure, I’d be fine with a training element if required. Shit, if my state required POST training to obtain a CCW and a $10K fee, I’d have one already. The fact that it is going to be in the classroom, with students, 8 hours a day, every day, while the teacher who is supposed to maintain control over it has many duties and distractions. That makes it a bit different than someone visiting a park or a playground for a few minutes. > [@](#): > > I think the first question is whether you think a person carrying a gun at all can make anyone safer. If the answer to that is no, then of course a teacher wouldn’t make the cut either. If the answer is yes, then the next step would be to delineate what makes the teacher’s situation different and to see if there are ways to mitigate those differences. Under some circumstances, yes, under others, no. The question is, is whether this particular action will make students safer. > [@](#): > > I don’t know about the ‘since Sandy Hook’ part, but [school staff](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/teacher-school-took-down-gunman-recently-trained-active-shooters/) Didn’t need or use a gun. > [@](#): > > can [be in a position](http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1732518&page=1) Didn’t need or use a gun. > [@](#): > > to [disrupt](https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/26/us/washington-school-shooting/index.html) Didn’t need or use a gun. > [@](#): > > an [active shooter](https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/170254/how-assistant-principal-gun-stopped-school-shooter-daniel-greenfield) Waited until shooter left the building, then went out to his car to get a gun and confronted him outside. > [@](#): > > sometimes. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/63 "2018-02-16T19:46:55Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Didn’t need or use a gun. > > Didn’t need or use a gun. > > Didn’t need or use a gun. > > Waited until shooter left the building, then went out to his car to get a gun and confronted him outside. You’ve moved the goal posts. Your assertion was that there actually hasn’t been another school shooting [since Sandy Hook - but I’m ignoring the time box] that an armed teacher **would have been able to disrupt.** Clearly, in those situations where a member of the school staff did disrupt, had they had a gun, they would have been able to disrupt it, since you know, they actually disrupted it. Were you trying to assert something else? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/64 "2018-02-16T19:50:19Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > It’s truly astounding how you liberals never learn. The “streets full of blood” fear-mongering has been around for decades, and it has ALWAYS been proven false. I’m curious. How many dead kids is the threshold for you? How many would need to be shot in school before you felt something should be done? Since Sandy Hook in 2012, “there have been at least 239 school shootings nationwide. In those episodes, 438 people were shot, 138 of whom were killed.” [CITE](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/15/us/school-shootings-sandy-hook-parkland.html) That is almost one school shooting per week. If wild dogs were roaming America and once a week they mauled several kids you’d be ok with that since it is not really “blood in the streets” and statistically your chances of dying by wild dog attack are pretty small? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/65 "2018-02-16T20:11:34Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > You’ve moved the goal posts. Your assertion was that there actually hasn’t been another school shooting [since Sandy Hook - but I’m ignoring the time box] that an armed teacher **would have been able to disrupt.** > > Clearly, in those situations where a member of the school staff did disrupt, had they had a gun, they would have been able to disrupt it, since you know, they actually disrupted it. Were you trying to assert something else? It’s not a matter of moving goal posts, it is a matter of determining what is safer for the students. These were disrupted by unarmed teachers, an armed teacher would not have made a difference. In all of those cases, the shooter stopped shooting without anyone using a gun to make them stop. In only the last case would a gun had made a difference at all in how long the shooter shot. OTOH, having guns in schools means that guns may be used in schools. If in those stories, the teachers had a gun, the perpetrator would not have shot any fewer people, but the teacher would have shot the student, including the 14 year old student who shot 3 shots down an empty hall. I think that if a teacher has access to a gun, they may find it more convenient to use it for disciplinary reasons. Not often, but we are talking about arming hundreds of thousands of teachers across the country. “Not often” still leaves an acceptable body count. That’s not including accidents or other issues of losing control of the gun. Unless school shootings become much more common and deadly, I don’t see how teachers being armed will decrease the overall number of students killed. If school shootings become more common and deadly, then there are other things we need to address, and militarizing our schools is just treating a symptom. ---
**Author:** ![SamuelA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@SamuelA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SamuelA)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/66 "2018-02-16T20:15:45Z")
I’ve got an idea. There’s no way \*this \*can go wrong. Since we can’t trust teachers, and we can’t hire enough security guards. So hear me out, I have a modest proposal : Sentry guns. Yeah. Let’s install in the ceilings of all major hallways a sentry gun. Basically a gun and cameras, in a pop out turret. During a mass shooting, the sounds of shots would cause the sentry gun to go active. It would use other cameras to localize the threat, and upon achieving a targeting solution, would deploy and use the actual gun camera for final adjustments before shooting the target dead. I see no reason to be concerned, this will make us all safer. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/67 "2018-02-16T20:16:20Z")
Making our entire country an armed camp will not lead to fewer shootings. ‘If everyone is armed, no one will dare shoot anyone’ is utter bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/68 "2018-02-16T20:18:32Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > I’ve got an idea. There’s no way \*this \*can go wrong. Since we can’t trust teachers, and we can’t hire enough security guards. So hear me out, I have a modest proposal : > > Sentry guns. Yeah. Let’s install in the ceilings of all major hallways a sentry gun. Basically a gun and cameras, in a pop out turret. During a mass shooting, the sounds of shots would cause the sentry gun to go active. It would use other cameras to localize the threat, and upon achieving a targeting solution, would deploy and use the actual gun camera for final adjustments before shooting the target dead. > > I see no reason to be concerned, this will make us all safer. Yeah, don’t hand [these](https://www.retroplanet.com/PROD/27241.html?gclid=CjwKCAiAn5rUBRA3EiwAUCWb26nooETQVs2BKyI49Zgnoq7inlmnM9iURwMYwPnPLrb2UNIEbGdUCRoCrrcQAvD_BwE) out at prom. > [@Chimera](#): > > Making our entire country an armed camp will not lead to fewer shootings. > > ‘If everyone is armed, no one will dare shoot anyone’ is utter bullshit. Once everyone is already shot and dead, there will be fewer shootings. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/69 "2018-02-16T20:22:49Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > It’s not a matter of moving goal posts, it is a matter of determining what is safer for the students. These were disrupted by unarmed teachers, an armed teacher would not have made a difference. > > In all of those cases, the shooter stopped shooting without anyone using a gun to make them stop. In only the last case would a gun had made a difference at all in how long the shooter shot. But it is moving the goal posts. The examples I gave were counterfactuals to your assertion. You are now asserting that had these staff been armed, the outcome would have been exactly the same. I don’t think that’s supportable, or a reasonable inference. Perhaps the shooter could have been neutralized earlier, perhaps later, who knows. But your original assertion that there hasn’t been a situation where armed teachers would be able to disrupt a shooter is false, because teachers have disrupted shooters. This isn’t a cost benefit analysis - it’s a false or not false analysis. > [@](#): > > OTOH, having guns in schools means that guns may be used in schools. If in those stories, the teachers had a gun, the perpetrator would not have shot any fewer people, but the teacher would have shot the student, including the 14 year old student who shot 3 shots down an empty hall. > > I think that if a teacher has access to a gun, they may find it more convenient to use it for disciplinary reasons. Not often, but we are talking about arming hundreds of thousands of teachers across the country. “Not often” still leaves an acceptable body count. That’s not including accidents or other issues of losing control of the gun. > > Unless school shootings become much more common and deadly, I don’t see how teachers being armed will decrease the overall number of students killed. If school shootings become more common and deadly, then there are other things we need to address, and militarizing our schools is just treating a symptom. This above is a cost benefit analysis. It’s based on basically assumptions which is wonderful and all. But really, I don’t find it persuasive enough to reply to other than the idea that I’m interested in teachers being armed if they want to not as a way to reduce or mitigate school shootings, but as an increase in individual liberty which is a goal unto itself. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/70 "2018-02-16T20:23:36Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > I’ve got an idea. There’s no way \*this \*can go wrong. Since we can’t trust teachers, and we can’t hire enough security guards. So hear me out, I have a modest proposal : > > Sentry guns. Yeah. Let’s install in the ceilings of all major hallways a sentry gun. Basically a gun and cameras, in a pop out turret. During a mass shooting, the sounds of shots would cause the sentry gun to go active. It would use other cameras to localize the threat, and upon achieving a targeting solution, would deploy and use the actual gun camera for final adjustments before shooting the target dead. > > I see no reason to be concerned, this will make us all safer. I can get you a good deal on some _ED 509_s. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/71 "2018-02-16T20:31:42Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > I’ve got an idea. There’s no way \*this \*can go wrong. Since we can’t trust teachers, and we can’t hire enough security guards. So hear me out, I have a modest proposal : > > Sentry guns. Yeah. Let’s install in the ceilings of all major hallways a sentry gun. Basically a gun and cameras, in a pop out turret. During a mass shooting, the sounds of shots would cause the sentry gun to go active. It would use other cameras to localize the threat, and upon achieving a targeting solution, would deploy and use the actual gun camera for final adjustments before shooting the target dead. > > I see no reason to be concerned, this will make us all safer. A close variant is feasible; picture a squadron of drones patrolling over a city, with directional microphones able to detect, identify and triangulate gunshots. When a “sighting” passes a particular level of confidence, a police pilot is alerted and can take direct control of one of the drones and decide if it’s gyro-stabilized sniper-accurate weapons need be used. Of course, it helps if the mass shooter is polite enough to stay outdoors. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/72 "2018-02-16T20:38:29Z")
Day 1: Arm every teacher in America Day 2-5: Headline: Teacher shoots and kills three children in class I would never arm teachers and fully support “gun free zones” in schools. I am a public school teacher, by the way. Middle School. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/73 "2018-02-16T20:45:27Z")
Kid takes gun from 60 year old teacher, kills her and several classmates. Expected NRA Response; She shouldn’t have been a teacher if she couldn’t handle herself. Let’s hire only skilled veterans as teachers. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/74 "2018-02-16T20:50:40Z")
The school board in my old district is seriously considering a policy to arm teachers, and a majority of board members are for it. The initial proposal was arming all teachers. However, that wasn’t going to work since so many teachers said they’d refuse to carry a gun, and for just the reasons stated in posts here. The proposal now is to arm teachers who volunteer. One of the board members owns a gun shop and, of course, he’s been the strongest proponent. (There have been questions about conflict of interest but no response as of yet.) Under the proposal, teachers would 1. be required to have a concealed carry permit. 2. undergo a psych evaluation, though it would only be used to “show suitability in stressful situations.” 3. undergo 16 hours of live–fire handgun training and 8 hours of scenario training. 4. provide their own, board-approved guns. Supposedly, students won’t know who’s carrying. (Few experienced teachers believe that. Kids are VERY observant.) Currently, there is one police officer in the high school, but he/she also gets called to other schools in the district. The police force is too small there to be able to respond effectively to a shooter, they’ve said, and the nearest SWAT team is 2 hours away. The majority of those who showed up to an open forum last month opposed the policy, but pro-arming board members say they don’t believe that’s representative of the community, and one said she didn’t care what the public wanted, as “majority [of the board] rules.” Still, they’re surveying the community. Whether or not that sways board members remains to be seen. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/75 "2018-02-16T20:53:20Z")
Off-hand I can think of four separate times teachers flipped out and physically attacked students because of something that was said(and no, the something that was said wasn’t anything like “I’m going to get a gun and shoot your ass, Mrs. Grimsby!”) and, personally knowing these teachers, I would guess that at least three of them would have pull their guns if they had been armed at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/76 "2018-02-16T21:02:49Z")
> [@nelliebly](#): > > one said she didn’t care what the public wanted, as “majority [of the board] rules.” As long as the board is elected, you bet their asses they’ll care what the public wants. Honestly, I’d expect a wave of teachers resigning in the face of this sort of thing. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/77 "2018-02-16T21:15:58Z")
The idea that arming teachers would stop these shootings is such a crock of shit. It takes years of tactical training to get to the point where anyone would have a chance in hell of getting a shot on an active shooter amid the chaos and noise of a mass shooting incident, and even then, there’s no way of knowing how you’d react under the effects of adrenaline. The only people who do know are people who have actually fired a weapon in anger, whether police or military, and even in that context, the competence in responding to a school shooting would vary wildly. A concealed handgun can be useful for self-defense against robbery or battery. SELF-defense. Anyone thinking (hoping?) about some kind of hero scenario where they’d be able to save a crowd of people from a spree shooter firing rapidly with an AR-15 is just indulging in a fantasy. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Krupe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@Leo\_Krupe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Krupe)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/78 "2018-02-16T21:18:42Z")
> [@nelliebly](#): > > The school board in my old district is seriously considering a policy to arm teachers, and a majority of board members are for it. > > The initial proposal was arming all teachers. However, that wasn’t going to work since so many teachers said they’d refuse to carry a gun, and for just the reasons stated in posts here. The proposal now is to arm teachers who volunteer. One of the board members owns a gun shop and, of course, he’s been the strongest proponent. (There have been questions about conflict of interest but no response as of yet.) > > Under the proposal, teachers would > > 1. be required to have a concealed carry permit. > 2. undergo a psych evaluation, though it would only be used to “show suitability in stressful situations.” > 3. undergo 16 hours of live–fire handgun training and 8 hours of scenario training. > 4. provide their own, board-approved guns. > > Supposedly, students won’t know who’s carrying. (Few experienced teachers believe that. Kids are VERY observant.) > > Currently, there is one police officer in the high school, but he/she also gets called to other schools in the district. The police force is too small there to be able to respond effectively to a shooter, they’ve said, and the nearest SWAT team is 2 hours away. > > The majority of those who showed up to an open forum last month opposed the policy, but pro-arming board members say they don’t believe that’s representative of the community, and one said she didn’t care what the public wanted, as “majority [of the board] rules.” Still, they’re surveying the community. Whether or not that sways board members remains to be seen. A whole 8 hours of scenario training (I presume that means facing attackers in simulations)? Holy shit, that’s ridiculous. In googling military simulations, I found this: [It's Artificial Afghanistan: A Simulated Battlefield in the Mojave Desert - The Atlantic](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/05/its-artificial-afghanistan-a-simulated-battlefield-in-the-mojave-desert/275983/) > [@](#): > > Units are deployed to Fort Irwin for twenty-one days, fourteen of which are spent in what Fort Irwin refers to as “The Box” (as in “sandbox”). This is the vast desert training area that includes fifteen simulated towns and the previously mentioned tunnel and caves, as well as expansive gunnery ranges and tank battle arenas. So what you’re saying is that teachers would spend one full workday simulating what is in essence a battle. I’ve spent more time in Excel training classes than that. And Excel training isn’t life or death. Something tells me the people in charge don’t know what the hell they’re doing. It’s all a fantasy to them. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/79 "2018-02-16T21:23:11Z")
At least we have an example of an apparently serious proposal with some training spelled out. Thanks for posting that, **nelliebly**. Would the district pay for the training and weapons, and do you have a sense of cost? ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Krupe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@Leo\_Krupe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Krupe)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2018, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927/80 "2018-02-16T21:26:43Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > At least we have an example of an apparently serious proposal with some training spelled out. Thanks for posting that, **nelliebly**. Would the district pay for the training and weapons, and do you have a sense of cost? That’s true, which is what I requested in the OP. I’ve already logged my objection with the example however. Still, I presume that teachers would carry handguns. How would they fare against assault rifles? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arming-teachers/808927.md?page=5)