Posted on 02/22/2018 12:33:17 PM PST by conservative98
President Trump on Thursday repeated his call to arm teachers to prevent mass school shootings — saying that as many as 40 percent of a school’s educators could pack heat and get bonuses for their efforts to keep kids safe.
“I want certain highly adept people, people who understand weaponry, guns … [and] a concealed [carry] permit” for teachers to carry guns on school property, the president said during a White House sitdown with members of his cabinet, lawmakers and Mayor Christine Hunschofsky of Parkland, Florida.
Fourteen students and three staffers were gunned down at a high school there by a 19-year-old former student armed with an assault rifle last week.
SEE ALSO Trump: I only said I would arm some teachers Trump: I only said I would arm some teachers Trump said the armed educators should get “a little bit of a bonus” and mentioned 10 percent, 20 percent and 40 percent as possible numbers of teachers who would qualify for the “rigorous training” that would be required.
School security guards alone are not the answer, he added.
“You can’t hire enough security guards … You need 100, 150 security guards. But you could have concealed [guns] on the teacher,” Trump said
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
“Who pays?”
I think you know the answer to that - Mr. and Mrs. middle class, who always end up paying the freight one way or another.
And that will be another black hole for the state and local tax money to be consumed by. The teachers unions will have a field day with this one.
Like the black kid at the meeting said, “Don’t let teachers have guns. They’re emotional!”... He has a point.
Why no you get extra pay if you’re a coach!
How much more would it cost to put armed guards in schools. The teachers are already there and being paid. With additional training, they can be qualified. Also, I suspect that many already have their own guns. I know I would.
So makes sense to give "gun pay" for teachers who train and certify to carry guns. I would support that.
I agree, you can arm a whole lot of teachers for an extra $100 / month each versus extra full time security guards.
In that case, Congress or state legislatures (or both) could eliminate the ban on guns in school. It would be a start.
If the job pays more for having a Masters degrees, then some can get paid more for getting gun training.
” Wow, a very good *capitalist* idea.”
With accounting improvements from Chad_the_Impaler
“Who pays?
The 40% of armed teachers get a 15% pay increase, while the remaining 60% get a 10% pay decrease”
Maybe it could become part of the taxcode, until we get the FairTax...
Only if the union and the school district agree on that in the next round of contract talks.
Look, I don’t think this is a bad idea. I just think the barriers to its ever getting done are insurmountable. The institutions that would have to go along with this are the very institutions that failed to prevent this shooting, even though everyone but the cat was telling everyone else, “Yo! This kid plans to shoot us all!”
If you don’t try, you’ll never know. Think positively.
I’m in my 22nd year of homeschooling, so I really have no dog in this fight. My interest in “trying” to improve government schools in any way ends once I’ve voted for the School Board candidates whom I don’t think are crooks or idiots.
Obviously, there will have to be some type of support for it. My point is that it takes police at least 5 minutes to respond to a shooting minimum (usually more like 10 minutes).. To stop the shooting, I believe that schools have to be made hard targets. To do that on a federal level would cost billions. The cheapest would be to allow trained teachers (preferably with their own weapons) to respond immediately, or even better, act as a deterrent to would be shooters.) The alternative is to do nothing, and allow the carnage to continue. I have spent much time in Israel, and the students are protected everywhere by armed escorts . Teachers, soldiers, armed citizens, etc. It is true that they have spent enormous amounts of their wealth for this purpose because they are fighting terror. It seems to me that we also have terrorism, but we are fighting with what? After each of these shootings, the call for disarming Americans and doing away with the 2nd Amendment is greater. Soon, we will be forced to do something to prevent our schools,churches, (soft targets) from being attacked. The alternative that I suggest is the cheapest (in my humble opinion).
I don’t like the idea of the government giving anybody anything. It’s not theirs to take from one and give to another when people have the Constitutional, and unalienable, right to arm and protect themselves.
If school districts are unable to provide a secure environment (for the students and all employees) through professional means then let them consider allowing qualified employees to voluntarily CC (conceal carry) in the classroom and on campus.
But I’m against any government entities or school districts paying out taxpayer monies to employees (that offer these services voluntarily) an additional fee. Professionals expect to get paid a fee, for those that volunteer, their service is their reward. First of all, teachers and staff are not professional gunslingers, they are hired to teach, support, and educate the students. But if they feel uncomfortable with the professional security measures, they should be allowed to CC anyway. If only as a last line of defense if the security measures in place should fail. (Which we have seen many times in the recent past.)
I’m for making the employees who participate eligible for manufacturers and other discounts on security related purchases. Also they should be eligible for one-time rewards and bonuses for any acts and deeds related to stopping acts of terrorism or terrorists.
First make sure the teachers carrying guns are sane. I know so many teachers who are taking antidepressants. They are so stressed after dealing with disruptive students each day that they go to the doctor and ask for something to relieve their anxieties. Then there are the female principals ...
I think a variety of sensible proposals have been made. However, all of them run up against institutions that have demonstrated, over and over, that they are not very interested in changes that would result in better outcomes for the “pupil personnel,” whether those outcomes are academic, social, or life-and-death.
However, it is always possible that the public will say, “Enough!” and demand change from the schools. Not probable, based on history and the current trajectory, but possible.
I agree. On the positive side, I think this might be that turning point. I don’t believe the status quo will remain. It is almost like conservatives are afraid to support defending the students for fear that the public will not support them. On the other hand, the media has managed to convince them that the people will not back them. I believe most of the country will support defending or children, and now is the best time to push that agenda.
I hope you're right on the first part, while on the second part, if not now, when?
Great point...
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.