Should teachers carry concealed weapons in class?

People are seeing this, putting “guns” and “school” together in their heads, and then a nuclear explosion is going off. In other words, they’re thinking with their emotions and not in a logical and reasoned-out way.

A concealed carry license is a concealed carry license. This means the holder should be able to take their firearm wherever they go, to work, if they want to (I’m against the idea of workplaces having a ban on licensed concealed handguns.) If they happen to work at a school, they should be able to carry at the school.

I’m of the opinion that a firearm is a tool that should be kept around in case of an emergency. (I mean, I also enjoy firearms in other ways, aesthetically, for historical value, accuracy, etc.) but ultimately, it comes down to that. If it’s true that the school is really 30 minutes away from any police or whatever, they would be very foolish to not have a gun around somewhere.

The kids have a 2nd amendment right to arms too. I am sure their parents have taught good safety rules to them. They should be allowed to carry in school…That would surely make the schools as safe as they could possibly be.

This kid I know got shot at my High School and it wasn’t mentioned on that list. What exactly constitutes a ‘school shooting’?

gonzomax - your sarcasm is not as funny as you think it is.

As the Wiki article says of itself, “This list is extremely incomplete.”

I’ll say! It doesn’t list the murder that one of my students committed on school grounds or the murder of one of my students by another after graduation off campus. If I can quickly think of two exclusions from personal experience, you can bet the list is sadly lacking. And that doesn’t include the girl who bled to death in the hallway from a knifing.

This is why I hate Wiki used as a reference.

I knew a teacher who carried a concealed gun. It was against the law to have any weapon on campus. He was a very quiet and pleasant man teaching in a school with a reputation. Outsiders and a very low percentage of the student body accounted for that reputation. Even the students who committed the murders involving school did not cause any problems in class.

I did have two that brought loaded weapons to class. One of them was the sweetest kid you can imagine. The other was a hothead that I had worked hard to make peace with. (I didn’t find out until years later that he had had a weapon. The administrators never told me.)

You see, some administrators try to cover everything up so that they will look good. I had a fucking convicted rapist in my class and wasn’t told.

No. Teachers should not be armed in a classroom. They should have four years of self-defense taught in teacher training. But if we are to the point of needing to go armed, we need to admit that the gig is over and close the door until the public is willing to support restructured schools with bodyguards and clerical help in every classroom.

Again, this isn’t about kids going nuts. It’s about being at the back of beyond and having no recourse if somebody comes on campus with intent to cause harm. Sound logic, sound response.

Then shouldn’t the response be securing the campus so that armed intruders are intercepted before they can threaten students and teachers? Why is setting up a classroom shootout with twice as much lead flying around an acceptable reaction to the threat of armed intruders?

Well, ignoring for the moment that the odds of an actual gunfight are vanishingly small, how do you propose the campus be secured? Armed guards? Roving attack dogs? Electrified fences? A moat?

Having one armed school official is a lot cheaper.

Why would a law preventing guns within a school district be any helpful. Kids aren’t allowed to carry guns already, so this law is about the teachers. What are they afraid of, a teacher snapping and shooting up the class? Why aren’t they scared of parents doing that?

FWIW, my professor for a class on the history of weapons carried guns. Two of them. One was a browning 1911 and the other one I forget.

Lisa: [referring to the “angel”] It could be anything. It could be a mutant from the nuclear plant.

Mr. Burns: Oh, fiddle-faddle. Everyone knows our mutants have flippers. Ooh, oops. I’ve said too much. [under his breath] Smithers, use the amnesia ray.

Smithers: You mean the revolver, sir?

Mr. Burns: Precisely. Be sure to wipe your own memory clear when you’re finished.

I’m still trying to figure out what the teachers and students of Bumfuck, TX need to be protected from.

I’m still trying to figure out what the teachers and students of Bumfuck, TX need to be protected from. The boogeyman?

I ‘unno. Gettin’ bumfucked?

Jeez, not this again…

Unless you assume teachers are evil or morons and that criminals obey the law, what’s the problem? Trained and responsible people with the ability to defend their students if the situation warrants. Just barely above minimum wage earning security guard or a well educated person with probably the same amount of training and experience dealing with students. Yeah, that’s a terrible thought.

Neither most teachers nor most CCW holders (in my experience) suffer from a Rambo syndrome. Even maybe in Texas.

Without armed teachers, it takes a lone nut, student or otherwise, for there to be a reason to need armed defence.

With armed teachers, it takes just one mistake or unsafe practice, and hey, you may have just armed a kid. I tend to think there’s more idiots than there are nuts.

My problem is not with the guns. It’s with the teachers. I do not trust every teacher to make zero mistakes and practice perfect gun safety. And if the comparison is against trusting kids not to try and murder each other, then I certainly don’t trust all of them not to take advantage of a misplaced weapon.

In my eyes, the risk is pathetically small, and the response is not appropriate.

Sure, assuming teachers have to buy their own guns, a feel good policy is certainly cheaper than an investment in prevention. It is unfortunate that the safety of our children comes down to what is cheaper.

So… it’s moats, then?

Or shot a kid, for that matter. Even if an armed intruder breaks in, there’s no guarantee that Ms. Crabapple is going to be able to take down Random Psycho Nut or Angsty Student With a Gun, without hitting their own students accidentally - especially if the shooter knows there may be armed people around and knows they have to get a human shield or move quickly to take out as many people as possible right away. Most people just aren’t that good of a shot unless they’re doing target practice or otherwise not under pressure.

I’m still trying to figure out what the teachers and kids from Virginia Tech and Columbine need to be protected from. The boogeyman?

Why people continue to make this argument, of all possible arguments, is beyond me. There are so many refutations to it that it’s not even worth making, yet it gets dragged out every time.

Presumably any armed nutter entering a US school will now shoot the teachers first.

This appears to be a particular problem for the US. As a teacher in the UK I don’t need or want a gun.