If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry handguns.......

Prometheus

If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry handguns, would the massacre have been prevented? Fully accept there is no need for semi automatic assault rifles in the hands of civilians, but if people were allowed to carry handguns would these spree killings be prevented?

Dodge

Prometheus wrote: »

If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry handguns, would the massacre have been prevented? Fully accept there is no need for semi automatic assault rifles in the hands of civilians, but if people were allowed to carry handguns would these spree killings be prevented?

There was armed guards at Columbine high school. Didn't matter a jot unfortunately

Dravokivich

Don't see what that'd achieve. It wasn't a current pupil at the school that did the shooting was it?

PizzamanIRL

No, most of them would probably be afraid to shoot the gun and they would have it in their desk or something and wouldn't be prepared. They're teachers, not police officers.

Fishooks13

Prometheus wrote: »

If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry handguns, would the massacre have been prevented? Fully accept there is no need for semi automatic assault rifles in the hands of civilians, but if people were allowed to carry handguns would these spree killings be prevented?

I think America has already shown that more guns doesn't mean less gun violence

It's also common sense

anncoates

Answer to out of control gun crimes: more guns.

Go to the top of the class.

bullets

PizzamanIRL wrote: »

No, most of them would probably be afraid to shoot the gun and they would have it in their desk or something and wouldn't be prepared. They're teachers, not police officers.

Reminds me of this video where even people who think they may be prepared
end up not being.

http://www.upworthy.com/the-nra-thinks-more-guns-are-the-answer-bless-their-hearts-then-watch-this?g=2&c=ufb1


~B

yoyo

Try taking down a "bad guy" kevlared up to the max and armed with a military grade SA rifle with just a handgun? I reckon it would take quite a bit of luck for that to work, especially as I doubt the teachers would be in a calm state of mind in such a situation. As mentioned Columbine had an armed guard at the school, and as there were 2 shooters in that case was not much use. Armed people would also be logically the initial target for the gunman not to mention how would the cops be able to identify the "good guy" from the "bad guy" if all the teachers and gunman/men are engaged in a shootout

Nick

Nody

Prometheus wrote: »

If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry handguns, would the massacre have been prevented? Fully accept there is no need for semi automatic assault rifles in the hands of civilians, but if people were allowed to carry handguns would these spree killings be prevented?

Statistic shows a home with a gun is more likely to have a death in the family that's gun related and you think giving the teacher a gun would decrease the deaths in a classroom for some reason? If anything the teachers will have them stolen, borrowed, threatened etc. and lose them even more often for more death; the only security is to reduce the guns not increase them.

Dravokivich

Nody wrote: »

Statistic shows a home with a gun is more likely to have a death in the family that's gun related and you think giving the teacher a gun would decrease the deaths in a classroom for some reason? If anything the teachers will have them stolen, borrowed, threatened etc. and lose them even more often for more death; the only security is to reduce the guns not increase them.

Statistics show a home with a gun has 100% chance of having a gun on the premises.

Shenshen

If teachers were routinely armed I think we could all rest safely in the knowledge that the next shooting will probably be committed by a teacher going postal rather than a total stranger....

gobnaitolunacy

Ah, the worn-out argument the gun lobby trots out in the wake of a spree killing. More guns = less killing.

My name is URL

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts =p

Of course if teachers had of been armed then not so many would have died, probably.

But why should teachers be expected to arm themselves? They're not law enforcers... And didn't the guns used by Lanza belong to his mother who was a teacher at the school?

Lollipops23

Unfortunately, they wouldn't have had time to run to their desks to grab, load and use a gun. The guy simply walked in and opened fire.

I also think keeping guns around small children is the height of stupidity- speaking as the relative of someone who was shot by a child (while she was 8months pregnant), after said kid decided to "play" with his dad's rifle.

Holsten

I doubt it, handguns are not accurate unless you've had a lot of training.

Even firing one in the range with no pressure you're not gonna hit the target every time, now imagine trying to hit a moving human target while you're scared as hell and they're firing back?

fatherted1969

Prometheus wrote: »

If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry handguns, would the massacre have been prevented? Fully accept there is no need for semi automatic assault rifles in the hands of civilians, but if people were allowed to carry handguns would these spree killings be prevented?

Next headline, teacher brings gun into school and attacks her own pupils. Where does it end

minidazzler

Teachers shouldn't be expected to carry. But they should be allowed conceal carry, with the weapon on their person at all times, never kept in the desk.

StudentDad

Bloody hell, what next? Razor wire with armed patrols? Security checkpoints? May as well change the curriculum too and add in boot camp, combat skills, tactical awareness for toddlers!

SD

archer22

If teachers were armed they would have the means to fight back,thats a fact..nobody can predict the outcome beyond that.Just because they are teachers dont mean they cant shoot straight.Anybody ever hear of Lance Thomas the LA jewellery shop owner who killed many armed robbers in his shop.Anyhow better to have a teacher firing a gun at a psycho than one throwing pencils at him!.

danniemcq

until one of the kids gets a hold of the gun when teacher isn't looking

or teacher forgets to lock the gun locker

or some clever kid picks the lock

yeah great idea

Rented Mule

Shenshen wrote: »

If teachers were routinely armed I think we could all rest safely in the knowledge that the next shooting will probably be committed by a teacher going postal rather than a total stranger....

...or by a student who manages to get hold of the teacher's gun.

danniemcq

Plus if attacker is wearing body armour pistol ammo probably won't do much bar knocking wind out of them and maybe on their arse thats about it

Rented Mule

The irony of this is that teachers are not being trained to be law enforcement officers/security, they are being trained to be assassins. They are being trained to kill anyone posing a threat to the students/school. Pure and simple.

mackg

minidazzler wrote: »

Teachers shouldn't be expected to carry. But they should be allowed conceal carry, with the weapon on their person at all times, never kept in the desk.

I think this whole idea is pretty off the wall but just giving teachers license to carry concealed weapons if they so wish is even more mental than making it mandatory and giving them training. People who carry guns for their jobs should receive regular and intensive firearms training. Is it in anyway practical for a teacher to do this on top of their schedule? No it isn't.

Plus you hear stories of schools in the states with metal detectors and stuff trying to keep weapons out, how would having weapons in the school help anything? Finally keeping a weapon on someones person hardly guarantees no one will be able to get the weapon off them. When I was in sixth year in school most of the lads in my class would have had no problem overpowering 60-80% of the teaching staff.

What's that you say? If they try to overpower the teacher then the teacher could just shoot them? Fantastic!

whitewave

I don't see how this would work at all. Surely the gun would have to be locked away safely, so that none of the students could accidentally set it off....if an attacker was to enter, in the time it would take to get the gun, half the class could be dead?

Guns shouldn't be so readily available there, full stop.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Dodge wrote: »

There was armed guards at Columbine high school. Didn't matter a jot unfortunately

In fairness there was only armed police officer assigned to the school and he was eating lunch in his car at the far side of the campus when the shooting started.

DavyD_83

Ah yeh, the more guns in the school the safer it will be.

Is this kind of logic actually seeping out of America now?

MadsL

DavyD_83 wrote: »

Ah yeh, the more guns in the school the safer it will be.

Is this kind of logic actually seeping out of America now?

Just wondering what the armed guards are for outside of banks, or why the IDF deliver money to Post Offices. The logic would appear to be similar, no?

Given that a couple of these teachers died going out to confront this kid maybe think might have been different. Even a trained former marine miitary veteran working as a teacher would not be allowed to have a gun in a school under the present laws.

The logic is not as crazy as it seems from the a distance of a largely gun absent society.

MadsL

MadsL wrote: »

Just wondering what the armed guards are for outside of banks, or why the IDF deliver money to Post Offices. The logic would appear to be similar, no?

Given that a couple of these teachers died going out to confront this kid maybe think might have been different. Even a trained former marine miitary veteran working as a teacher would not be allowed to have a gun in a school under the present laws.

The logic is not as crazy as it seems from the a distance of a largely gun absent society.

Yes it is.

Teachers having guns increases the likelihood of teachers shooting students
Teachers having guns increases the likelihood of students getting the gun and shooting people
Teachers having guns doesn't increase the likelihood of the assailant being stopped half as much as people make out, 50/50 at best and if the teacher does indeed lose the gun fight that's one more gun for the perpetrator and well, a more angry perpetrator.

Why do you have security guards for banks etc? Because they are targets for armed robberies, last time I checked people don't try to rob schools, so no the logic isn't the same.

mike65

Either a teacher would end up the killer (or does every teacher need to be armed to stop the one that goes crazy?) or a pupil gets their hands on it and thinks it would be fun to pretend to shoot himself or someone else dead. Of course that could be prevented if every child was also armed...oh wait.

o1s1n

Shenshen wrote: »

If teachers were routinely armed I think we could all rest safely in the knowledge that the next shooting will probably be committed by a teacher going postal rather than a total stranger....

Better arm the students too so...

archer22

How many people would refuse the offer of a gun if there there was Psychopath in their building on a rampage..would they say "NO!! more guns is not the answer!"..I doubt it.

archer22

archer22 wrote: »

How many people would refuse the offer of a gun if there there was Psychopath in their building on a rampage..would they say "NO!! more guns is not the answer!"..I doubt it.

The issue isn't when theres a pyschopath there. The issue is that on 99.9999999% of school days there will not be, but there will still be unnecessary guns, increasing the likelihood for people to be shot.

archer22

mike65 wrote: »

Either a teacher would end up the killer (or does every teacher need to be armed to stop the one that goes crazy?) or a pupil gets their hands on it and thinks it would be fun to pretend to shoot himself or someone else dead. Of course that could be prevented if every child was also armed...oh wait.

Does the same apply to Police,Soldiers,Security Guards etc,or is there some defect in Teachers that would make them more prone to becoming mass murderers ?

View

Prometheus wrote: »

If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry handguns, would the massacre have been prevented? Fully accept there is no need for semi automatic assault rifles in the hands of civilians, but if people were allowed to carry handguns would these spree killings be prevented?

Well, why stop at the teachers?

Arm the students!

I am sure nothing could go wrong with an Elementary school full of kids with semi-automatic rifles. :eek:

goose2005

View wrote: »

Well, why stop at the teachers?

Arm the students!

I am sure nothing could go wrong with an Elementary school full of kids with semi-automatic rifles. :eek:

Semi-automatic? What good are they against a school shooter with a fully automatic rifle? Schools need artillery cannons just to be safe.

archer22

AdamD wrote: »

The issue isn't when theres a pyschopath there. The issue is that on 99.9999999% of school days there will not be, but there will still be unnecessary guns, increasing the likelihood for people to be shot.

You know you are right there in a way..the 99.99999999% of days there are no psychopath..The media creates hysteria over those tragedies but more kids are killed off their bicycles in a year in America than in School massacres.

Biggins

Prometheus wrote: »

If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry handguns......

.... Anyone contemplating attacking a school expecting a teacher to become armed - might thus bring even more weapons, more heavier weapons, come bullet-proofed to some degree and/or bring hand explosives...

They also might re-target their anger towards other avenues, large groups instead or plan their tactics in a circumventing route.

Food for thought...

MadsL

View wrote: »

Well, why stop at the teachers?

Arm the students!

I am sure nothing could go wrong with an Elementary school full of kids with semi-automatic rifles. :eek:

So much for any sensible debate. Everyone here is quick to mock this proposal, what others do you suggest? What steps do you propose to prevent an active shooter in schools. At Sandy Hook, the Principal let him in through the airlock because she knew him. Should all non-teaching adults be banned from schools?

One alternative approach would be the creation of classroom panic buttons, classroom panic rooms, and centralised lockdown of classrooms and steel doors with teacher-only code override.

That is all a hell of a lot more expensive than what is being proposed and could actually work in the active shooter's favour.

What is being proposed is a trained armed guard and for teachers to be allowed (not forced) to carry personal weapons (under normal concealed carry license, following training) if they choose. At the moment teachers cannot carry in schools even if they wish to do so.

There have been cases of active shooters being stopped by teachers. Assistant principal Joel Myrick, for example, he used his own pistol to stop a shooting on October 1, 1997 at Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi. He was lucky enough to be at his car (where he kept his .45 pistol during school hours) when the shooting started, had he been in class, likely the shooting would have been much worse. The shooter was wearing a ballistic vest by the way.

It is easy to make silly 'merica type comments, however Americans deal daily with the fact that there are 350 million guns in circulation and this is not going to change any time soon.

If schools remain zones where you are 100% unlikely to encounter a gun then they will remain killing fields of choice for the unbalanced. Active shooters are mentally ill not stupid. Schools and cinemas are easy for the shooter to lockdown and most are "gunfree" allowing plenty of time for racking up enough kills to make the headlines, a stated aim of many spree killers. Arming "someone" within those zones would doubtless reduce those incidences.

3ndahalfof6

Biggins wrote: »

.... Anyone contemplating attacking a school expecting a teacher to become armed - might thus bring even more weapons, more heavier weapons, come bullet-proofed to some degree and/or bring hand explosives...

They also might re-target their anger towards other avenues, large groups instead or plan their tactics in a circumventing route.

Food for thought...

I agree, as wrong as it would be the situation would just be approached in a different way, but in saying that there is also the chance a head shot from a single fire arm could bring the possible death total to a minimum,

it is just fooking crazy what is going on and unfortunately I am sure it will not be the last, I just hope I never see it happen to someone I love.

Difference Engine

If Sandy Hook School teachers were allowed to carry assault rifles, wore body armour and trained together in firearm tactics regularly then maybe just maybe they might have stopped it.

But at that point they'd be a SWAT team not teachers. A SWAT team is what's needed to deal with an active shooter.

If Sandy Hook was to be stopped without any loss of life it would have to have been stopped long before Adam Lanza picked up a gun, not as he was walking through the front doors of the school.

RandomName2

MadsL wrote: »

So much for any sensible debate. Everyone here is quick to mock this proposal, what others do you suggest? What steps do you propose to prevent an active shooter in schools. At Sandy Hook, the Principal let him in through the airlock because she knew him. Should all non-teaching adults be banned from schools?

Apparently this isn't true - with the additional security measures recently introduced in Sandy Hook School (which made delivering of children more awkward for parents) the perpetrator had to actually break into the school - which attracted the attention of the Principle, Vice Principle and School Psychologist - thus leading to the first deaths.

Sometimes you have to say that crap happens, and that you can do things to lessen the likelihood of it happening, but it cannot be absolutely prevented, nor should crazy measures be taken to attempt to prevent them from happening.

Arming teachers would lessen the likelihood of it happening - but wouldn't be a guarantee. It would also significantly increase the risk of death from other causes, to such an extent that the idea should just be ruled out imo. Panic button's not a bad idea though - it wouldn't guarantee that people wouldn't be killed in these sort of situations, but would reduce the time it would take for authorities to respond; it also wouldn't make everyday life more unpleasant either!

mossy95

Fishooks13 wrote: »

I think America has already shown that more guns doesn't mean less gun violence

It's also common sense

Not neccsialry Switerland has the lowest crime in the world and averybody over the age of 18 has a gun.

Recluse

Do you think if adam lanza had of been a teacher this would have prevented him from murdering children? It is horrific that someone that was apparently extremely intelligent and had a lot to offer society became a mass murderer. Ideally society would take responsibility and not abandon people who do not fit in with norms but seeing as how this will never happen it's probably a bad idea to arm them.

Manic Moran

Nody wrote: »

Statistic shows a home with a gun is more likely to have a death in the family that's gun related and you think giving the teacher a gun would decrease the deaths in a classroom for some reason? If anything the teachers will have them stolen, borrowed, threatened etc. and lose them even more often for more death; the only security is to reduce the guns not increase them.

A number of school districts and universities allow staff and students to be armed at their discretion, and have done so for several years. They have not yet had any issues that I am aware of. You just don't hear of it often. Shootings at Pearl High School and Appalachian School of Law were responded to by armed staff (PHS) and students (ASL). Since the death tolls weren't too high, you don't hear much of them. Even the University of Texas in 1966 saw the shooter pinned down by return fire from students until police could make their way up the tower.

I don't see how this would work at all. Surely the gun would have to be locked away safely, so that none of the students could accidentally set it off....if an attacker was to enter, in the time it would take to get the gun, half the class could be dead?

Quite the opposite. It would be on the person at all times. It is the only way to maintain positive control of the weapon (Plus, as you say, it's far more useful).

Teachers having guns increases the likelihood of teachers shooting students

Hasn't happened yet in the places where firearms -are- allowed on campus.

Teachers having guns increases the likelihood of students getting the gun and shooting people

Students currently don't seem to have had any difficulty getting guns not from teachers. And who is going to tell the student which teacher is carrying a firearm on any particular day? I don't see this as being an issue.

Teachers having guns doesn't increase the likelihood of the assailant being stopped half as much as people make out, 50/50 at best and if the teacher does indeed lose the gun fight that's one more gun for the perpetrator and well, a more angry perpetrator.

And the source for your 50/50 is...? As far as I am aware, armed teachers have a 100% success rate. One out of one. One more gun for the bad guy doesn't make a difference, he's already armed and shooting. And if he's already killing people, I'm not sure how his being more angry is going to affect matters much (unless it affects his judgement)

Better arm the students too so...

As mentioned, has not proven to be a problem in universities which permit concealed carry.

Anyone contemplating attacking a school expecting a teacher to become armed - might thus bring even more weapons, more heavier weapons, come bullet-proofed to some degree and/or bring hand explosives...

They already are, so I'm not sure how that makes matters worse. And if the guy doesn't come armoured, it gives them more chance than not.

Sparks

Dodge wrote: »

There was armed guards at Columbine high school. Didn't matter a jot unfortunately

There weren't. There were two armed police officers, one of whom was there purely by coincidence; and their rules at the time said not to pursue an armed person into a school (those rules were rewritten in the aftermath of Columbine).

BTW, the GOP are the only ones I've heard seriously suggest the whole "arm the teachers" line after Sandy Hook, and they're... well, they're smaller than the NRA so they have to make more noise. Which is a bit cynical I suppose, but it seems to fit.

And the NRA's proposal, of putting armed security guards in schools? It's not exactly new...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUBSE4KFQ1c

It's a pretty awful situation when putting armed people into schools is being considered as an actual solution to something; but honestly, you have armed guards in banks, at malls, at airports and in other places even in Europe (seriously, go to the continent sometime) so it's not exactly way out beyond the pale; and if you haven't solved the problems that are leading to schools being shot up like this, and your kids were going there, wouldn't you try anything you could to keep them safe??

Suryavarman

AdamD wrote: »

Teachers having guns increases the likelihood of teachers shooting students

No it doesn't. If a teacher wanted to start shooting kids now, they would just bring their guns into school and start shooting. At least if other teachers were allowed to conceal carry there is a chance the shooter could be stopped.

Teachers having guns increases the likelihood of students getting the gun and shooting people

How exactly are the students going to get the gun. Are they going to tackle an adult teacher much stronger than them and take their gun from the teacher's holster? It would be a stupid thing to do considering they would probably be shot and die as a result of trying to do so.

Teachers having guns doesn't increase the likelihood of the assailant being stopped half as much as people make out, 50/50 at best and if the teacher does indeed lose the gun fight that's one more gun for the perpetrator and well, a more angry perpetrator.

The assailant doesn't have to be stopped for this policy to be a success. They just don't have to start shooting in the first place. If Lanza thought that a couple of teachers would be armed would he have really chosen to perform a mass killing at this school?

Why do you have security guards for banks etc? Because they are targets for armed robberies, last time I checked people don't try to rob schools, so no the logic isn't the same.

People don't try to rob schools but they obviously tried to mass murder children in them. That's kind of why this thread exists.

byhookorbycrook

People don't "rob schools?"Sorry, but happens all the time.

mackg

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

People don't "rob schools?"Sorry, but happens all the time.

What do they take? Computers?

sdanseo

danniemcq wrote: »

Plus if attacker is wearing body armour pistol ammo probably won't do much bar knocking wind out of them and maybe on their arse thats about it

So aim for the head.

Yes, if every teacher was licensed to concealed carry a firearm and had been doing so that day, the death toll would almost definately have been lower.

Unfortunately, routinely arming every teacher in America is a ridiculous and patently irresponsible suggestion, and would undoubtedly cause more problems and deaths than the combined total of spree shootings.

The problem can only be fixed by removing weapons from society to a huge extent, not unlike how firearms are managed in Western Europe. That, unfortunately, will never happen. Although such a move is not explicitly prohibited by the US constitution (they have a right to bear arms written in 1793, when the best weapon available was a single-shot rifle or musket - any constitutional court would have no problem finding that they are only entitled by right to similar weapons with similar firing rates and capacity) the politicians would never hear of it.

Catch 22.

Cedrus

A lot more could be achieved by implementing a comprehensive mental health programme.

According to a recent studyby Mother Jones most of the mass killers were mentally ill, most were carrying legal weapons and NONE were successfully stopped by an armed 'good guy' A report on the FBI website describes mass murder as a number of murders (four or more) occurring during the same incident, which rules the Pearl High School incident out of this study.

Map and Criteria
Data