ajc.com
Archives
Services
Web

Home
News
- Metro / Georgia
- Atlanta / South Fulton
- Cherokee
- Clayton
- Cobb
- DeKalb
- Fayette
- Forsyth
- Gwinnett
- Henry
- North Fulton
- Georgia Politics
- Traffic
- Weather
Special Reports
- Atlanta Forward
- CRCT Coverage
Blogs
Opinion
Sports
Blogs
Topics
- SEC Sports
- More topics »
Features
Entertainment
Blogs
Topics
Features
Travel
Topics
Features
- Vacation rentals
Business
Features
Lifestyle
Blogs
Topics
Features
Obituaries
Homes
Jobs
Cars
Classifieds
Shopping

Would armed administrators stop school shooters who begin their rampages expecting to die?

9:03 am January 8, 2013, by Maureen Downey

Snow-covered stuffed animals with photos attached sit at a memorial in Newtown, Conn. Tuesday, Dec. 25, 2012. People continue to visit memorials after gunman Adam Lanza walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Friday, Dec. 14, and opened fire, killing 26, including 20 children, before killing himself. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle)

School systems across the country are beefing up security in the wake of the Newtown massacre that took the lives of 20 young children and six educators, including the principal and school psychologist who confronted the gunman.

(Here is a story on the White House’s plan to meet this week with gun violence victims’ groups, gun safety organizations, gun ownership groups and representatives from the entertainment and video-game industries to discuss ways to stop the next Newtown.)

One response is to increase the number of guns in schools, either through armed police officers in every school rather than only in middle and high schools or by allowing trained adults in the buildings to carry firearms.

Those advocates argue that it was not by chance that Adam Lanza chose an elementary school to stage his deadly attack. He had attended the local schools and probably knew he would face a greater possibility of armed resistance in the middle school and high school.

However, other assailants have targeted schools with armed school resource officers, including the Columbine High killers. In talking to experts on school shootings, they describe the shooters as disturbed young men who expect to die so the presence of an armed police officer on the campus may not matter to them. Their goal is to kill as many other people as possible before being stopped by an officer’s bullet or by a self-inflicted one.

A police officer in every school is costly so state Rep. Paul Battles, R-Cartersville, is proposing to allow school administrators to carry concealed weapons in buildings, school events and on school buses. Battles says House Bill 35 bill is not a mandate.

As posters here have noted, an effective deterrent in Newtown was a locked classroom door. There is a call to fortify classroom doors and to get rid of doors with breakable glass windows.

According to the AJC:

Rep. Paul Battles, R-Cartersville, has prepared legislation lawmakers could consider when they return to session beginning next week. The bill would empower school boards to allow one or more administrators to carry a weapon at school, at a school function or on a bus. Anyone chosen to carry a weapon would have to complete a state peace officer training course and qualify each year.

Battles said he’d rather have a trained police officer in every school but local boards and the state don’t have the money.

“We went through the discussion process of even possibly deputizing some of the administrators,” Battles said. “We had long discussions about different approaches. We came up with what I feel is the cleanest, most appropriate way for school systems to deal with their inability to provide security.”

The bill does not require an administrator in each school to be armed but provides the option.

–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog

109 comments Add your comment

ylojkt

January 8th, 2013
1:25 pm

Also, for the crowd saying that guns don’t belong in schools, when I went to HS (Wills HS in Smyrna), I learned to shoot at the school gun range. The range was indoors, and we had an armament room where the rifles and ammunition was stored. That’s right, folks, once a week, our class of roughly twenty students in grades 8 – 12 were standing in a room in our HS armed and fully loaded and learning how to handle and fire weapons. On weekends, many of us, including our beloved instructor Col. Boatwright, would go camping with our own personal weapons and shoot for recreation. There were approximately 120 kids in the Army ROTC program at our school, all of whom were armed every week for a period of time and not once did anybody get shot or go on a rampage with their school issued rifle.

emo

January 8th, 2013
1:30 pm

I can’t help thinking this idea is completely about selling more guns. Once, the NRA was a gun-safety organization. Now, it’s just a lobby for gun manufacturers. If the manufacturers would provide free guns and training, I might believe them, but so far, no.
And as far as mental health goes, are we going to test every one of 330 million Americans, and lock up those we disagree with? Are we going to guard them to be sure they take their medications? Or are we going to keep weapons of mass destruction out of their hands? Probably not.

ylojkt

January 8th, 2013
1:39 pm

Maureen, I have posted on your blog before, although not much since it’s rarely a topic I feel like throwing my two cents in for, but I am very active on the sports blogs and occasionally others on AJC. Why are my comments awaiting moderation for so long this time?

ylojkt

January 8th, 2013
1:49 pm

Try this on for size about our corporate government and it’s desire to limit dissent – http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

Same fear of your voice is the reason for fear of your guns.

Jerry Eads

January 8th, 2013
1:49 pm

Law-abiding folks who carry but have no training are perhaps more dangerous to themselves and those they might have to defend than they are to the perpetrator. And training just to not shoot oneself is good, but it’s a HUGE step from there to actually doing well what you need to do when the time comes.

Administrators who are highly trained (and maintain their training) are one thing. Administrators with no more than a background check (current Georgia law) might be less than adequate.

Rick L in ATL

January 8th, 2013
1:53 pm

A better option is a highly trained “air marshal” in every school, walking an irregular beat. We wouldn’t have gone back aboard airplanes after 9/11 without air marshals; I don’t understand why we’re not discussing “ground marshals” more now. Those of you who think you can make schools gun-free zones simply by declaring them so are nuttier than the nuttiest of gun hoarders. (And they’re plenty nutty).

A few dozen haphazardly-trained admins with guns? No thanks. A single dedicated professional trained to confront crazy killers? Not perfect insurance, but a hell of a lot better and safer than no insurance.

And spare me the money argument. What would you pay to prevent another Sandy Hook? If your answer is anything other than “at least what it costs to put an armed air marshal in every school,” you should really check yourself.

BTW–a third of US schools have armed “resource” personnel already; it’s not like this is a novel idea. We just need to shore it up and make sure these folks get A1 training.

resno2

January 8th, 2013
1:55 pm

Beverly, I agree with your questions, but are we remotely prepared to deal with another potential tragedy?

To those afraid of firearms, what do you propose?

Starik

January 8th, 2013
2:17 pm

We’re not going to solve the “firearms” problem without a few more decades of political and social evolution. Some people are afraid of guns. Another large group is comfortable with them. There are many millions of guns out there, .

What we can do is improve the treatment and supervision of people who are dangerously mentally ill, and do everything possible to prevent their purchase and possession of guns.

Fireman

January 8th, 2013
2:31 pm

“Schools should immediately remove doors to all classrooms, lunchrooms, etc and replace with bulletproof doors with very strong locks.”

aaaand what happens when there is a fire and the kids can’t get out and no one can get get in to help?

Fireman

January 8th, 2013
2:35 pm

Dr. Monica — Columbine also had armed officers on site – did no good at all.

10:10 am

January 8th, 2013
3:12 pm

How do Israeli schools go about preventing such tragedies? … http://blnnewsdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/7-28-3.jpg

Teaching is worse in FL

January 8th, 2013
3:12 pm

Interesting that no one has ever mentioned “non lethal” deterrents like Tazers…

Beverly Fraud

January 8th, 2013
3:21 pm

Actually…I did : )

(On Maureen’s earlier blog)

What another poster pointed out is that, with full body armor, a taser is likely to have little to no effect.

indigo

January 8th, 2013
3:26 pm

Many Judges in courtrooms now have a gun handy.

Is a Judge’s life worth more than a school child’s?

Maureen Downey

January 8th, 2013
3:30 pm

@ylo: Not sure why you went into moderation if you were a prior poster — the blog does hold first-time postings, based on IP address and screen name, and posts with more than two links. But all your stuff is out now.
Maureen

Beverly Fraud

January 8th, 2013
3:32 pm

I must admit, I’m in a state of shock that someone said Beverly Fraud had a “well reasoned response.”

Any chance it was Herb Garrett posting under a pseudonym?

Old South

January 8th, 2013
3:51 pm

“You seem to be playing into an agenda to prohibit citizens from owning “firepower” ”

I specifically used the word citizen for a reason. When the country was founded, one had duty. That duty came with responsibilities and of course rights.

Now, I’m hoping this country either gets a dictator who can muster us back to a civil society, or a complete break from what we call the United States. It’s a lost country today. How ironic to try and build Iraq, the cradle, as we crumble.

That will be historical irony.

wes

January 8th, 2013
3:52 pm

I am a responsible gun owner and would be very comfortable with it. My school principal and asst. principal are military veterans with combat experience. Several other teachers are also former military.

oneofeach4me

January 8th, 2013
4:16 pm

Those who are mentally disturbed do NOT think logically. They do not select shooting locations based on them being a Gun Free Zone (school, theater, etc). The mentally disturbed usually displace their anger in a way that makes them feel as though they have gotten revenge for/on whatever/whomever has caused them pain. For example, Adam Lanza’s mother had volunteered at the school and it has been said that he felt as though his mother loved those kids more than she loved him. So he kills her and then goes to reap havoc and where he thought her heart lied. If only he knew the love of a mother, but again, mentally disturbed people do not think rationally.

I am with others here who have said that there are just too many questions that have not been addressed in regards to placing armed individuals (officer, admin, teachers, whoever) inside of schools. Now I do think that addressing school safety measures is a VERY good idea. Every school should have some sort of “safety” plan in place just as they do for fire drills and tornado drills.

No matter what we as a society do, we will never completely rid it of evil or violence. However, there are things we can do to minimize the damage either of those can cause. Mental health awareness (which also incorporates what violent video games actually do to the minds of children and teenagers), having and teaching good morals and values, and reasonable gun control are all needed to combat this issue. It’s already been studied and found that by 2015, deaths by guns will outnumber deaths due to car accidents. You can attribute that to a couple of things. One being the end of the ban on assault rifles, the freedom to sell your personal firearm to anyone you please (with the exception of knowingly selling to a convicted felon), access to high capacity magazines and shrapnel type bullets that are designed to tear holes in the human flesh, and the flip-side to that being the regulations that were placed on the automobile industry to make cars safer for everyone on the road. Seems to me it’s time for gun makers to fall in line with auto makers in that respect.

bootney farnsworth

January 8th, 2013
4:20 pm

what a pant load of left of center whining. grow a pair, the collective lot of you. almost every single response against the concept comes directly from the move on script. almost none of you are bothering to think the issue.

as much as a waste of time as this is, I’ll do it for you.

strawman issue #1 columbine had one, and it didn’t work.

-so? it was the first time anything like that happened on that scale. like 9-11, no one was prepared for that kind of madness. the police had no clue what to do. using this stupid logic, lets never roll the police if it happens again. everyone, expect for the flat earth crowd just say no crowd has used that tragedy to learn and grow.

strawman issue #2: society must evolve.
-the vast majority of US citizens believe in the right to own a firearm. this has not changed in any major way, and shows no sign of it in the future. if anything, comments coming from congress are hardening the resolve of people to defend their right to own a firearm

strawman issue #3 – no one mentions non lethal options.
-incorrect. they are discussed all the time, and in fact are already in place. ergo, the entire concept is moot, except for the attempt to make it look like parts of the US are pinning to make the lunchroom the OK Corral.

strawman issue #4 – the NRA only promotes selling guns.
-so stupid as to not merit comment beyond acknowledging its place in move on talking points

strawman issue #5 – poorly trained admin types running around with guns
-please…no one except the flat earth posters on this blog and their fellow travelers would ever agree to allow untrained/unqualified people to run around a school with a gun. if they don’t meet ever rigid standards established by law enforcement – it doesn’t happen

strawman issue #6 – if we do this, that might happen. what if, what if, what if
-everything in life has risks kids are FAR more likely to die driving to school than due to a security measure.

strawman issue #7 – what if a student is involved.
if a student is an immediate, realistic, threat to inflict physical violence or potentially kill someone else,and THERE IS NO OTHER reasonable alternative….drop the little thug.

in the final, real life analysis, it comes down to this. we live in a violent society. wish it weren’t, but it is. we either deal with the reality of it and take appropriate steps to protect our schools, or this sort of thing will happen again. and be worse.

also, not sure how so many got convinced the removal of firearms will make society safer. it won’t. in fact, it will do just the opposite. just ask Chicago, DC, or NYC. strictest gun control laws in the USA, most violent cities in the US.

bootney farnsworth

January 8th, 2013
4:21 pm

and to answer the obvious question – the only way to stop a suicide attacker is to kill them first, or as soon as possible.

Shon

January 8th, 2013
4:29 pm

Instead of just pacifying the problem how about be work towards fixing it? Violence is best solved at home. Raise your kids better and reach out to those in need. Problem solved.

KIM

January 8th, 2013
4:37 pm

This is very healthy dialog. We have different perspectives. When “Paul Fisher” writes that he has control over his child’s safety most of the time, I feel very concerned. Mr. Fisher, you are living in fantasyland, but if it makes you feel good, go ahead. The fact is none of us is as safe as we are when we are just in our own homes, like hermits. Any time we leave those confines we are thrust into the craziness of the world. Oh, but, wait a minute. Didn’t a lady working at home with her two daughters just experience ahome invasion? She was armed and no harm done to her and her daughters physically…emotionally I bet they will suffer a bit. Arming more people is not going to satisfy the public’s needs. @Grumps: Your last line leaves me confused. Are you suggesting that an unarmed person in a school is not as responsible as you? I hope not.

KIM

January 8th, 2013
4:41 pm

Oh, and I totally applaud the lady who fired five shots in the intruder. Go, Mama. That makes total sense. That is self/family protection like it should be.

Ole Guy

January 8th, 2013
4:52 pm

GDit, when are you people going to stop fooling yourselves. This arming of educational pros is nothing short of complete BS…absurdity, if you will. It’s a GD shame that armed law enforcement personnel have to monitor the hallways; now you want everyone to get ready for the shootout at the ok corral…while, of course, placing full efforts on delivering anything resembling an education fit for the finest 3rd world country. Let us not overlook a minor issue called ROE?Rules Of Engagement. While balancing lesson plans, science projects, and the multitude of educational minitue, all educators must now include daily weapons cleaning and quarterly quals at the range…JUST HOW GD REDICULOUS CAN WE GET?

cris

January 8th, 2013
4:52 pm

@bootney….I’m not sure asking the shooter “are you planning on committing suicide?” before you take him out is going to work….unless maybe he’s got GONNA KILL MYSELF tattooed to his forehead…

ylojkt

January 8th, 2013
5:10 pm

Thanks, Maureen!

Wilbur

January 8th, 2013
6:02 pm

What if we regulated those people with certain diagnoses or who were taking certain meds? That seems a much more common sense solution to our problems than arming us all or depriving hundreds of millions of law abiding citizens of their constitutional rights.

Private Citizen

January 8th, 2013
6:47 pm

Here’s who you should be worried about:

“Top executives at CNN and National Public Radio were more than a bit surprised when they learned that their organizations had used interns from a rather nontraditional source-the United States Army’s Psychological Operations unit (PSYOP).” “We have interns from all over the world, but they are accredited journalists or studying [the field],” says Eason Jordan, CNN president of news gathering and international networks. “But those interns had no business being here.”
http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Martial_Law/Turner_psyops.htm
____________________________________________

Should not have been there? yeahrrr right. This story is not obscure if anyone wishes to research it.

Private Citizen

January 8th, 2013
7:14 pm

Enter your comments hereLet’s not forget the great public lie organized and rehearsed by the pubic relations firm Hill and Knowlton getting a rehearsed 15 year girl to tearfully tell the story as a press release on-camera, “Nayirah stated that after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers take babies out of incubators in a Kuwaiti hospital, take the incubators, and leave the babies to die. Though reporters did not then have access to Kuwait, her testimony was regarded as credible at the time and was widely publicized.”

This fabricated and designed propaganda lie was used and promoted by George Bush, Sr. himself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu8CCJTJCQk

Private Citizen

January 8th, 2013
7:21 pm

Difficult to see! “Very serious” congressional testimony from 15 year old girl with scripted and rehearsed story written by a military / industrial / governmental public relations firm. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmfVs3WaE9Y

She’s reading a script. Wonder if she is crying because it hurts to lie and she is forced to do so.

Timmy

January 8th, 2013
7:23 pm

Would unarmed administrators stop school shooters who begin their rampages expecting to die?

Interesting Observation

January 8th, 2013
7:33 pm

I don’t know. Part of me says anything to protect the kids, but another part of me says that faculty and staff may develop a false sense of security and become less vigilant knowing administrators are armed.

GAOLDEDUCATOR

January 8th, 2013
7:37 pm

The scary part of many of these comments are from the teachers/former teachers that had such destain or lack of respect of the administrators and teachers they worked with. Why would any parent send their kid to a public school with insiders with these feelings? Why would one choose to work in environments that sound to be so miserable?

Rick L in ATL

January 8th, 2013
7:41 pm

@ Fireman: Heavy duty sliding steel bars, not that big a deal. Don’t complicate this. A locked door saved a whole classroom at Sandy Hook (look it up). It’s an easy, low-tech, low-cost way to start.

Jan

January 8th, 2013
7:48 pm

Since school shooters tend to be disturbed young men, maybe the best solution would be to euthanize all young men. Wouldn’t that solve the problem?

Oh, yeah, wait a minute. There was a disturbed young woman may years ago that shot up a school playground because she hated Mondays… Maybe we should euthanize all young women too.

Then we wouldn’t need schools… Totally solves the problem.

NOTE: This is EXTREME SARCASM!!!

In all honesty, you can’t legislate craziness away. Mental health systems would be a better place to put the money instead of arming school administrators. But we need to improve the laws and the system to make it easier to get disturbed people and their families the help they need. And if treatment fails to help, we need to keep the patient in a humane controlled environment to protect society.

AnnieAD

January 8th, 2013
7:52 pm

Beverly Fraud raises some interesting questions.

In regard to bullet proof doors and glass, would children hide behind them all day and not go out of the building or room for recess or lunch? Not a very realistic option.

I love teaching. I hate what it is becoming...

January 8th, 2013
7:54 pm

I wonder what my principal who had a habit of throwing things at teachers she was upset with would have done if she had access to a gun. Having dodged a stapler or two, I shudder to think.
I note that none of the “arm the educator” proponents have answered Beverly Fraud’s questions…and very good questions they are too!
Nor are they merely “what if” scenarios. Some of them strike very close to home.
What about the time one of my students tried to stab another student with a pair of scissors? Would I have been justified in shooting the attacker to try and prevent the other child from being stabbed? As it was, I placed myself between them and ended up with the scissors slicing through my hand. At the time, there WAS no other choice, other that standing aside and letting the chips fall where they may. But what if I had been armed? THEN I would have had to make a slip second decision to possibly end a life to possibly save another. Certainly, I would never chose to shoot a child to keep from being stabbed in the hand, but I could just as easily have been stabbed in the neck or the chest, and then he could have gone after the other student as well. I would not really know the outcome, would I? And would people understand my decision, whatever it was? Would I be supported, or prosecuted?
One about the child who had another child down on the floor and was banging her head against the tile? Could I have shot that one to stop the attack? You can die from having your brains bashed in, you know. As it was, I and another student managed to pull him off…but what if no one else had been there to help? At what point could I pull a weapon? If I didn’t shot the child, and the other child ended up dead or brain damaged what then? Would I have been blamed for NOT taking action with a weapon?
What about the child that tired to bash another child on the head with a baseball bat? Was deadly force okay then?
What about the time an irate parent came to the school threatening to kill a teacher? While we waited for police to arrive, could we have used deadly force to stop the parent who was trying to break down the door to the teacher’s classroom? Turned out he wasn’t armed, but how would we know? Would we have to wait till he attacked the teacher or shot her to use deadly force? Or would it be similar to a home invasion, where you can shoot someone who is threatening you in your home?
What if a child gets a hold of a gun from a teacher or administrator and uses it on others? Who is at fault? Is it the teacher who kept the gun in a locked cabinet the child broke into? Is the administrator who was jumped and the gun taken away? Would the school be liable? How much are you willing to pay in extra taxes to cover the lawsuits and insurance costs?
What if I choose NOT to carry a weapon, and the intruder comes in through my door. I have no gun to shoot them. Do I then get vilified for not being willing to carry a gun to protect my students? Do I get accused of not caring enough about them? (I suspect yes, as I have already read such comments out there in the blogosphere.) What if I do shoot at them and hit a child? Am I then forgiven, or sued?

Come on folks. If you want to arm educators, you better be ready to deal with the realities of your choice. I want some answers here. Please let me know when it would be okay to shoot a child, or not shoot a child, or accidently shoot a child, etc. I don’t want to go to prison for getting it wrong.