Skip to comments.Some real solutions for making schools safer.
Posted on 12/20/2012 9:57:55 AM PST by servo1969
OK. What are your real solutions to make schools' "Gun Free" zones safer? The current policies are as useful as the TSA - they only give the illusion of safety while actually accomplishing nothing.
I think there are a few different changes that can be made both to the schools and the policies in place. I've tried to limit it to things which aren't really that noticeable to the students. My idea was to make them safer without making things look all that different.
First of all the doors should lock when closing and people should need to be buzzed in. I know, I know. A lot of the schools were already doing this and then stopped because it became too much of a hassle. Well, make it so that it's not a pain at all. Rearrange things so that it's simple and no big deal to follow the rules. If the door is not visible from the desk then install a good camera and intercom if necessary.
How about a little ballistic film on the entrance and exit door windows? If the money is available you could even put some on the classroom doors. You might not even have to replace the glass you have currently. A high quality film on both sides might keep someone out or at least slow them down long enough for the faculty to execute their planned response.
And when I say response I mean various things. The faculty and students should drill at least once a month for this sort of thing. But, once again, it doesn't have to be a big deal to the kids. Call it a fire drill or an earthquake drill or whatever you wish. Only the faculty needs to be concerned with the full aspects of the drill.
The planned response to an armed intruder should be both passive AND aggressive.
The passive should at the very least include calling 911(duh), locking doors and sending the kids to the areas of the rooms that have the least line of sight for any bad guy. All of this should be part of the drills. These passive actions are probably in place at most schools already. And none of them will stop an armed intruder who is truly determined to kill.
So that's where the aggressive response comes into play. The only real thing that will stop a killer is to severely injure or kill him. Up till now the killers have always had the advantage. There has been nobody in the schools who can oppose them with any real force. That needs to change.
Some people may opt for armed guards but guards are expensive and stand-out in the crowd. I think the teachers and other faculty in the schools should be utilized as armed security. Now, I know what some will say. "My kid's teacher is an idiot! Now you want her to be an armed idiot, as well?" Listen, I've seen my share of stupid teachers but that doesn't mean they're necessarily dangerous. And besides, I'm not suggesting we just say "Hey, if anybody wants to bring a gun to school, knock yourself out!"
The teachers should have to volunteer to carry on the job. There should not be any extra pay for doing so. That way only the people who really want to carry will bother. They should have to attend classes by the NRA or police dept. and qualify with the gun they will carry. This qualification should expire every 90 days or so. Then they must re-qualify at the appropriate facility. If they violate a school policy or seem to be acting a bit 'iffy' in some way their permit can be revoked. They won't lose any money if this happens because they weren't being paid for it in the first place. They just won't be allowed to carry at work until they satisfy some guideline or another.
Now, like I mentioned awhile ago, all of this should be 'under the radar' so to speak as far as the kids are concerned. The people who carry should do so safely and discretely.
The students should see nothing but this:
While their security remains quietly just out of sight:
Now I wouldn't recommend thigh holsters for teachers in elementary schools. There's too many kids grabbing the teachers around the legs and the whole idea is for the kids to be completely unaware of the guns. It shouldn't even come up in conversation any more than necessary.
So, to re-cap: Harden the building just a little, have a plan for an armed attacker and practice it, and use some of the people you have on the job as armed security. These are just a few ideas I had. I expect many people will disagree with them. Maybe some will sound good. Something needs to change and I can't see how taking guns away from people who have never hurt or threatened anyone will make children any safer. But, then again, safety is not really the point of gun control no matter what certain politicians may say.
Charge parents $1000 per child per year for public schooling. Give $1000 tax credit per child per year for home schooling.
What about the thousands of female teachers that don’t want to carry a firearm? If I was required to carry one, I could want my salary increased to reflect the added responsibility.
Too bad there aren’t many 25-50yo men that want to be teachers.
Put these men in schools and keep them there. All day, every day. Fortify entrances to schools and classrooms. This needs to be done in every single school. Install electronic and secondary security systems staffed by plain clothes personel who are carrying concealed.
If something is precious to you, then defend it like you mean it, otherwise, it's obviously not precious to you.
“Too bad there arent many 25-50yo men that want to be teachers.”
There are. However, they would rather hire unqualified minorities to fill quotas then hire men. When I applied, I got the, “I am sorry, you are not what we are looking for” talk from administration.
Sandy Hook had already implemented this and it did not prevent Adam Lanza from getting in. He knew when the doors wete locked and entered the school shortly before the doors were locked. So, how is this a solution?
I'm starting to come down on the side of arming the teachers. Someone here at FR posted an interesting graphic that showed an armed teacher in Israel and an unarmed teacher in America. In the last 10 years in Israel, there have been 8 students killed at chool. Compare that to 323 American students killed in school in the last 10 years and tell me what works best?
WARNING: Adults on this campus are armed, and will use deadly force in case of threat to life.
Spread the word through internal announcements and news media.
This can be done before actually arming any teachers or administrators, and will act as an immediate deterrent against would-be assailants.
I had a response ... but I forgot what it was when I saw the pictures.
These are good suggestions. I’m going to share this. Thanks!
I’m a 43 yo IT guy in a school District. About a 1/3 of our faculty are male. One of our Principals is a current National Guard Reservist.
Since Israel has a population of about 8-9 Million, and the US has about 330 million, the comparison of 8 to 323 works out to just about the same rate per capita, so I would not claim that as convincing evidence.
Not trying to start a fight, just looking at the numbers.
I live in the totalitarian state of New York city under Despot Mike Bloomberg (luckily so far, internet is not yet banned under Despot Bloomberg so I can still write to the outside world), and what I find curious is if you wander around the city in high crowd areas like Times Square, Time Warner center, 5th avenue, you’ll almost always find cops wearing full riot gear, helmets, brandishing automatic rifles. Yet around the schools absolutely nothing like that. Not even armed guards as far as I can tell.
To me this is done on purpose by Despot Bloomberg to let the people know they are living in a police state while at the same time letting them know they have absolutely no protection when it comes to them or their children, the better to submit to the police state like cowering lambs.
Pretty curious isn’t it? We are given the reason that these cops are armed like this in these high crowd areas because of the threat of terror, yet what good are guns going to be against some Mohammed who blows up his car which was attempted quite easily a few years ago and did not succeed because the explosives malfunctioned. Estimates were at a few 1000 people dead if these explosives did go off. Under the noses of these armed cops, Mohommed simply parked his explosive laden vehicle, lit the fuse and walked calmly away. No shots, nothing.
Yet how many school shootings have their been already as compared to some place like Times square? I say all this to show this guy Despot Bloomberg is completely full of BS when it comes to protecting kids or even the people. He does not give a damn about them. It’s all about power with this guy. Holding on and expanding his power in the totalitarian state of NYC. Making sure the people are not armed so as to keep them oppressed and cowering under the thumb of his police state. Continuing to steal the money of the people, dictate lifestyles to them, how they should eat, dress, work, play and how and when they should even help the less fortunate. Yes you read that right, he confiscates food donated to the homeless.
Years ago, I recall a scene from a movie, in which the frontier schoolmarm had a little trouble with some adolecent types that were about the sixth grade or so, and were already shaving, They were giving her all kinds of grief, which she settled in a rather unique way - she produced a six-shooter and had them stand up at the front of the room, with one of the old-fashioned inkwells from the school desk, filled up, on their heads. Then, rather like William Tell, she shot the inkwells, the ink ran down over them, and the formerly truculent youngsters, with tears streaming down their cheeks, were sent home, to explain to their mothers why their heads, faces and clothes were ink-stained. For sure, they would never be able to explain this to their fathers.
Dang, I wish I could recall the title of that movie. It might have been something about Annie Oakley.
Those kids NEVER gave her any more guff.
It's... instructive, to say the least.
Its often been observed that perception is more important than reality. The observation is often correct. It is never MORE CORRECT than for those weve come to call liberals. I prefer statist but liberal has morphed from its classic meaning to the other end of the spectrum so Ill stay with it.
Since these folks operate almost entirely on EMOTION and FEELING, REALITY seldom allows FACTS to intrude upon the delusional worldview they have constructed and the comfort that provides them. It is that illogical, irrational and delusional mindset that prompts many of them to continue to quest after a Utopian society. The thought that such a society can and will never be achieved in a fallen world populated with failed sinners never penetrates whatever remains of their cognitive consciousness. Its a DANGEROUS WORLD and, as the liberals continue to define deviancy down, it becomes more dangerous daily.
There is another, far more sinister, level of the liberal call for gun control.
It was Mencken who offered that The urge to save humanity is most often a false front for the URGE TO RULE. He clearly had been a student of the liberal politicians of his day. Were he alive today and able to observe the likes of Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, Obama and the rest, hed almost certainly have used far stronger language to frame his sage observation.
To conclude, dozens of studies reveal the FACTS concerning gun control. Those FACTS are that where firearms are widely and READILY available to law-abiding citizens, CRIME GOES DOWN! The liberals who willfully ignore the FACTUAL EVIDENCE and continue to call for gun control (i.e. the DISARMING of DECENT CITIZENS, thereby denying them the ability to exercise their God-given right to self-defense) are those about whom Mencken wrote: Their goal is NOT about preserving life. It is about the hell-bent pursuit of the impossible to achieve Utopian world where all are equal but some (thatd be THEM) are MORE equal than others (thatd be US).
There are many PRO-RTKABA videos on You Tube that your often busy lives dont allow you to find on your own. Search there for Gun Control, watch them and, more importantly SHARE THEM with the folks in your orbit.
Were in a fight. And losing will ultimately cost us much more than our right to our guns.
Dick Bachert 12/19/2012
Would that of worked last week? would you get close enough to an armed man to use mace?
So should all those already hired minorities be armed? For years, I’ve read how freepers don’t think much of liberal, woosie teachers in our public schools, now we want them all to be armed? Or use LEOs that most here denigrate as jack-booted thugs?
Perhaps Israel just doesn’t have those students that want to do these things, like the US has?
Locks on car doors don’t stop serious car thieves, but you would be foolish not to use them because you considered them futile. In a horrific situation like Newton, your goals become something like this:
1: Try to keep the intruder out as long as possible. Make the intruder spend time and resources to gain entry, or possibly make them change plans, making their attack less effective.
2: Try to limit the intruder’s movements once inside your facility. Basically, this is just goal 1 above, applied recursively to smaller portions of the building.
3: Have hardened “safe rooms” for precious assets, and a plan to get them there in a minute or two.
4: Have staff members that can deploy offensive measures. Guns, gazers, mace, heck, have you ever been blasted by a big fire extinguisher?
5: Video sources throughout the building that LEO’s can access, in the event that the intruder is still at large when they arrive.
Age and existing building design will dictate what measures are practical for goals 1 and 2 and 3, building codes can take care of future structures.
Goals 4 and 5 are just a matter of deciding to to them.
That would be probably the most effective and cheapest method to achieve quick results.
Good for you and your school district. Have you seen the national statistics on the ratio of women to men teachers in public schools, especially the lower grades? I think your 33% is pretty far above the norm.
That is, of course, the one unthinkable approach to the problem. A liberal so abhors the sight and thought of guns that he truly feels it is better that 20 children get massacred than that there be legal guns in a school. To a liberal it is worth any number of dead innocents(except, perhaps, himself) to preserve a gun free status.
It's psych warfare against psychos. The schools should follow up with the real thing as soon as they can make it happen.
Do not hire armed police all you will get is the rejected TSA people. Make the teachers carry guns.
A female will shoot you quicker than a male will when children are involved. It's the whole "emotions" thing I guess...
I went over and read The post including the update. I checked around and found this. 1 member of the Congress tried to repeal the law that prohibits firearms around schools. And that guy was Ron Paul. I am not a paulbot BTW.
The guy makes a lot of sense sometimes.
To repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 and amendments to that Act.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Citizens Protection Act of 2011’.
SEC. 2. REPEAL OF THE GUN-FREE SCHOOL ZONES ACT OF 1990 AND AMENDMENTS TO THAT ACT.
(a) In General- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking subsection (q).
(b) Related Amendments-
(1) Section 921(a) of such title is amended by striking paragraphs (25) through (27) and redesignating paragraphs (28), (29), and (32) through (35) as paragraphs (25) through (30), respectively.
(2) Section 924(a) of such title is amended—
(A) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking `(k), or (q)’ and inserting `or (k)’; and
(B) by striking paragraph (4) and redesignating paragraphs (5) through (7) as paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively.
(3) The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (18 U.S.C. 921 note, 922 note; section 1702 of Public Law 101-647; 104 Stat. 4844-4845) is repealed.
what they need to do, is install a small lock box in the admin office, and store 2 pistols. have the box wired so that accesssing it alerts the local police.
when trouble starts, authorized people in the admin office would have to be able to quickly open the safe, grab the guns and attempt to deal with the threat.
the teachers wouldnt like having guns in the school, but they would have to learn that its a different world and
they cant afford to be disarmed sheep.
I wonder how many folks would get behind repealing 922 in it’s entirety from Title 18.
It’s ALL in explicit violation of the Second Amendment’s prohibition and none of it comes near being an Art 1 Sec 8 power of the FedGov.
I saved a newspaper article w/ picture of two of my wife's teacher friends at the range during one of their weekly practice sessions. Both were shooting .357 magnums although they probably dialed back to .38 special for the range time. Both have since retired from teaching. I'm guessing that both went for their CCW as soon as Wisconsin joined the rest of the real world.
We all need to communicate to our Congressmen about the bill.
Strike while the Iron is hot. Point the blame of those children being killed to the law that let it happen. Use the lefts tactics on the left.
That law had it been repealed by Congress may have saved some of those kid’s lives or all of the lives lost at the school.
I sent her a reply already pointing they don't have the authority under the Constitution. I'm not expecting a reply back.
I really don't like gun haters. A more ignorant, or downright criminal, bunch you will never meet.
Since your previous post I have come across this Can you look at it. And give me an opinion on what it means I do not speak lawyer talk. I did ask someone to forward this to ARFCOM, I don’t have an account there. Here is the link to the SCOTUS case.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 93-1260 Argued: November 8, 1994 -— Decided:
After respondent, then a 12th-grade student, carried a concealed handgun into his high school, he was charged with violating the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, which forbids “any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that [he] knows . . . is a school zone,” 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)(1)(A). The District Court denied his motion to dismiss the indictment, concluding that § 922(q) is a constitutional exercise of Congress’ power to regulate activities in and affecting commerce. In reversing, the Court of Appeals held that, in light of what it characterized as insufficient congressional findings and legislative history, § 922(q) is invalid as beyond Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause.
Held: The Act exceeds Congress’ Commerce Clause authority. First, although this Court has upheld a wide variety of congressional Acts regulating intrastate economic activity that substantially affected interstate commerce, the possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have such a substantial effect on interstate commerce. Section 922(q) is a criminal statute that, by its terms, has nothing to do with “commerce” or any sort of economic enterprise, however broadly those terms are defined. Nor is it an essential part of a larger regulation of economic activity, in which the regulatory scheme could be undercut unless the intrastate activity were regulated. It cannot, therefore, be sustained under the Court’s cases upholding regulations of activities that arise out of or are connected with a commercial transaction, which viewed in the aggregate, substantially affects interstate commerce. Second, § 922(q) contains no jurisdictional element which would ensure, through case-by-case inquiry, that the firearms possession in question has the requisite nexus with interstate commerce. Respondent was a local student at a local school; there is no indication that he had recently moved in interstate commerce, and there is no requirement that his possession of the firearm have any concrete tie to interstate commerce. To uphold the Government’s contention that § 922(q) is justified because firearms possession in a local school zone does indeed substantially affect interstate commerce would require this Court to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional Commerce Clause authority to a general police power of the sort held only by the States. Pp. ___.
REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which O’CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which O’CONNOR, J., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a concurring opinion. STEVENS, J., and SOUTER, J., filed dissenting opinions. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined.
I don't know but they would have had a hell of a lot better chance than with bare fists. The reality is that all teachers won't carry so give them something, anything that might give them a chance.
I bet a number of them did have mace or something similar, but no chance to use it.
Decision over turns the original Gun Free Schools victim disarmament nonsense. It was redone and repassed in 1996. Hasn’t been rechallenged yet that I can find.
Meet me by the bicycle rack after school!!
Just kidding. I think you are looking at the wrong thing. In this case, the numbers don't tell the story; in fact, they provide misleading information.
Israel is surrounded by enemies who are constantly trying to destroy anything they can and kill as many people as they can. That's a bit different than the US who's enemies, for the most part, are separated by oceans or thousands of miles of land.
If we take the event that triggered this debate, the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary, and we envision Connecticut not as a state in the United States, but as a sovereign nation surrounded by other sovereign nations that may be hostile to it, does that change the picture for you?
IMO, if we take the cut and dry numbers you calculated to provide another number for the solution, we ignore the fact that those numbers represent a person. People are unpredictable. On any given day, Egypt, Hamas, Lebanon, Syria, or Jordan may, individually or collectively decide to launch an attack against Israel. That's NOT the same thing as a lone, mentally disturbed individual launching an attack against small children in an unarmed school.
So, I believe that the comparison between 8 children murdered in school in the past 10 years versus 323 children murdered in school speaks volumes about having armed teachers.
Thanks. I will look at the 1996 law.
Here you go...
The kid that did the shooting wasn’t an enemy of anyone, was he? I think that Israel just has different kids than we do in the US, as do a lot of countries.
There is a vast difference, here. I don't know if you were intending to be factious or not, but I think we need to explore the sociological issues involved.
Israeli children grow up with the threat of random violence every single day. That's very similar top the children in the 50s and 60s who grew up during the Cold War, knowing that war could break out at any moment between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. Israeli children, as the result of Israel being founded primarily as a religious state, grow up surrounded by religion, God, prayer and an awareness of the religious history of Israel.
Most American kids have no clue what that environment is like. They don't have the fear of an attack at any moment. They haven't necessarily lost friends and classmates to this kind of violence. But, they HAVE been raised in an environment in which God and religion have been under steady attack from the left - INCLUDING the schools!
So, IMO, what we are seeing in America is a vastly different situation than that of Israel and to make a comparison on that basis is unfair.
When we analyze the rash of shootings that have occurred this year alone, we find that they are perpetrated by people who are mentally disturbed or are unable to perform any sort of critical thinking because the schools don't like it when the students can outthink the teachers. And, the demand by the ACLU and other liberal organizations to "mainstream" kids who have mental or emotional issues is not helping those troubled kids. In many cases, mainstreaming only aggravates the situation because the troubled kid may be isolated or teased by his/her "normal" classmates.
To make a long story just a touch longer, the comparison between Israeli kids and American kids is not an apples to apples one, it is an apples to lettuce one.
I grew up in the 50&60’s, there was no violence and the cold war was nothing like what Israeli kids experience.
Of course it’s different. That’s why statistics for Israel can’t be used.
I don't know for sure but thought all such "weapons" were forbidden in schools.
I don’t see why. I doubt they have purse inspections for 40yo 3rd grade teachers.
Adam Lanza was 20, not a kid. But, the issue is that HE wasn't an enemy of anyone, he considered those children and that school to be HIS enemy.
It's not a matter of playing word games, it is a matter of perception. Adam's mother voluteered at the school and spent a fair amount of time with those kids. Adam had been home schooled from about the 8th or 9th grade (I think), but saw his mother constantly going to Sandy Hook to volunteer her time with those children.
As a result, Adam didn't believe that his mother was spending as much time with him as he needed her to. This caused an anger to build in him toward a building and its occupants. He wasn't going after anyone in particular at the school, he was trying to kill a THING that he believed was robbing him of his mother's love. Those children and teachers simply became the faces of the thing he was trying to kill. This is how a mentally disturbed person sees these types of situations.
When we compare that to what is happening in Israel, the Arabs surrounding Israel are trying to destroy Israel and everything that represents or is a face of Israel to them. This includes destroying Judaism which, for the most part, goes hand in hand with Israel. So, we can see a parallel between Adam Lanza and the Arabs because both are trying to eradicate something that the believe represents a threat to them. Adam believed that the kids were a threat to his mother's love for him, the Arabs believe that Israel is a threat to their security (when the truth is the exact opposite - but don't ever try to confuse an Arab with facts!). Israel, in essence then, represents a THING to the Arabs that must be destroyed just as The school and its occupants represented a THING that Adam Lanza needed to destroy to regain his mother's love.
Every Marine I know — and that’s quite a few — never takes just a brain to a potential gunfight!