Posted on 04/05/2013 3:01:18 PM PDT by EXCH54FE
In response to the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, lawmakers in Indiana are looking to pass a bill that would require at least one teacher, principal or staff member to carry a firearm in every school in the state.
Proponents of Senate Bill 1 argue that having armed personnel in schools would help to keep students and teachers safe, providing both a deterrent and a line of defense against a deranged gunman — an approach to school security that is fully endorsed by the National Rifle Association’s National School Shield Program.
“I’ve been approached by several teachers that would love the ability to have their natural right to self-defense recognized and would gladly do this without being paid,” Indiana bill sponsor Rep. Jim Lucas told Fox News.
The bill, which cleared the House Education Committee by a vote of 9-3 on Tuesday, gives schools the option to decide whether it wants to hire a student resource officer (essentially a sworn police officer) or simply provide training to teachers or other school staff members.
Either way, if the bill is approved the GOP-controlled General Assembly, someone will have to be armed and trained.
“We want someone who’s familiar with firearms who feels secure in that position and I suspect in almost every school across the state of Indiana I suspect there will be people who will step up and be trained for that position,” State Rep. Jerry Torr told local news affiliate WFPL.
Though, not everyone is on board with SB1. Some critics have argued that the legislation is vague, and doesn’t spell out the training requirements in enough detail.
(Excerpt) Read more at guns.com ...
I think this is misnamed. They should be honest and say that they are removing the victim culture in schools. And it should be ANYONE who wants to carry may legally do so.
A choice is better than a requirement any day.
A generous Texan is offering free shotguns to Hoosiers for self protection:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3004488/posts
schools should have a security station with fulltime personel who are armed, in radio contact with one another, and patrlling the halls perpetually.
I’m not on board with this. Having an armed “security officer” is good when there’s a nut with a gun running around shooting students. And exactly how often does that happen, really? So, in every school, 99.999999% of the time, what exactly is that guy supposed to do?
I strongly suspect he will “look for things to do” and that involves snooping into the privacy of others, which is inherently what people with guns and badges who are employed by the government do.
The better approach is to allow each school district to determine the appropriate level of security, and to authorize them to implement what they see fit. Most larger districts have “resource officers” from the local PD who cover the schools. If school staff do their jobs, they spot the loonies early and the resource officer checks it out and is in the school where the threat is possible.
Personally I’d like my state to go back to the way the laws were in the early 80s when I was in school. It was completely up to the individual.
All the teacher wannabes I know are always griping about how few openings there are for new teachers. A lot of the parents I know are worried about their children being sexually molested in school by teachers. (A child is more likely to be molested in school that at church!) Here is my proposal: Require all teacher wannabes to undergo an in depth background check required to obtain a concealed carry permit and required the teacher WANNBE to obtain a concealed carry permit BEFORE she or he can be issued a teaching certificate. If the teacher allows the concealed carry permit to lapse, her (or his) teaching credential will also lapse. That simple change in policy will prevent schools from being soft targets for mentally ill cowards such as Adam Lanza.
This is the way to do it. This is the only way you can respond the threat of madmen.
You can’t possibly disarm every criminal or madman in the USA. There are already laws on the books that attempt to do that and succeeded only in disarming the honest folk who might otherwise deter or prevent such massacres rather than being victims themselves.
What New York, Connecticut, and Colorado have done was insane, and will have no effect on school security. Indeed if anything they will only make such massacres all that more easy to carry out.
Having an armed teacher or guard in the school means they can throw something other than just their bodies at an armed madman.
The Sandy Hook school shooting should have brought this reality home to everyone when the School Principal was reduced to throwing her body at the shooter in a futile attempt to stop him.
Imagine how many lives the might have saved if she had just had a gun.
A law such as this should be passed in every state that cares for the safety of their children.
“All the teacher wannabes I know are always griping about how few openings there are for new teachers.”
It is a real tragity too given how many teachers might actually teach if they were just capable of losing their job to one of theses hopefuls.
“I think this is misnamed. They should be honest and say that they are removing the victim culture in schools. And it should be ANYONE who wants to carry may legally do so.”
Parents need to know how to use a gun before their children can.
What you suggest is too far ahead of where we are politically. Start with the teachers, be sure their trained, and give liberal areas the option of employing a specialized and full-time armed guard.
The other shortcoming is one is not enough, a school should have at least two such individuals stationed on opposite ends of the school with one or more of them being anonymous. Otherwise a madman who plans ahead might start with a surprise assault on the one with a gun.
The school district where I live voted for armed security now is place. Did so after the last school shooting that made the news nationwide.
I meant that any adult who is permitted to carry in their respective state should be allowed to do so on school grounds. Teachers, administrators, coaches, janitors, the lot of them.
Problem with one or two armed vs. anyone is that one or two people are now targets for any madman smart enough to look it up. You can bet your bottom dollar that radical leftists would file FOIA requests to release the names of those people, which then put them in danger.
I did not mean to insinuate that students be allowed to carry except maybe high school students involved in extracurriculars involving firearms.
O then i most certainly agree with that, although to pull it off would require an act of nullification.
Indeed Indiana is probably going to have to “deputize” said teacher or guard just to help protect them from the Fed's ugly head which is itself an act of nullification.
Even if you did in my heart I would agree provided said students were trained in gun safety and irresponsibility. It is not unprecedented at all in American history for school aged children to carry guns.
The problem today is soo few of our population's parents understand them. This needs to change, and I would even go so far as to suggest in 5-15 year we should start pushing for mandatory gun classes in some largely rural states like Alaska, Wyoming, and Texas. The justification being that the State cannot afford to enough law enforcement to guarantee the safety of the population and therefore requires an armed populous to help provide fro the security of a free state.
If the Feds ask call it militia training, and blame them for making it necessary due to allowing foreign gang infiltration.
With all of the drugs we’re pumping into ourselves and our kids these days, I don’t know that I even trust some cops to be armed. Back in the day, if someone was depressed, they drowned their sorrows in a bottle of booze and got back on the horse. If they were anxious, they waited longer. If boys were hyper, it was considered normal, and they were told to go outside and play until they were calm.
Psychos, addicts, and the mentally unstable were locked up or sent to the front lines of a warzone. They either learned and were released or died in captivity. The way we capitulate to every little handicap is ridiculous today. Not everything needs a pill.
Psychos, addicts, and the mentally unstable were locked up or sent to the front lines of a war-zone. They either learned and were released or died in captivity. The way we capitulate to every little handicap is ridiculous today. Not everything needs a pill.”
Its an industry that we know the left have designs to uses to control people and suppressed political decent.
I personalty have some first hand experience with this industry and I know exactly what your talking about. People aren't dealing with their problems anymore their just calling them medial issues and using drugs to cover them up.
I suppose we as a population don't realize that our minds are more powerful than we think. If Kim does managed to set off a nuke 500km above The State of Kansas theses people and those around them are going to have a very serous problem as all the drugs run out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.