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

usually lurking

January 8th, 2013
9:11 am

Seriously people? I think I’d pull my child out of a school that had a bunch of armed administrators running around.

Short answer

January 8th, 2013
9:14 am

Not a bit.

Concerned DeKalb Mom

January 8th, 2013
9:17 am

I would pull my children from a school with armed teachers and administrators. No question.

Little we can do to stop crazy people.

Mitch

January 8th, 2013
9:23 am

Virginia Tech has a police force, Georgia Tech has about an eighty person police force so am not so sure that having armed people in the school will help. I think we need to work on our “gun culture” and cut down on the daily shootings in Georgia and other states. This notion of every one carrying a gun is how we got here in the first place. Too many guns on the street. They are needed in the home as is often demonstrated. Teaching good family and personal values will go a lot further than havding every jock and jane carrying a gun to school.

Metro Coach

January 8th, 2013
9:23 am

It won’t stop them from trying(they are suicidal after all), but it would help them reach their preferred goal much faster if they got popped as they walked in the door rather than after they’ve killed several children.

hopespringseternal

January 8th, 2013
9:25 am

It is topics like this which make it hard to have a cogent discussion on pressing matters. This is the usual dose of silly coming from the legislature. Absolutely not, and I too would pull my children from such a school.

Lynn

January 8th, 2013
9:42 am

As a former public school teacher, I would have been terrified if any of our administrators were carrying weapons. The people I worked for were neither particularly bright nor ethical. The last thing they needed was to be packing heat.

Beverly Fraud

January 8th, 2013
9:46 am

It appears in the Newtown case it would, as it has been reported to staff lunged at the gunman unarmed. But every case is different.

To allow guns (because in some scenarios they undoubtedly would save lives, in others cause greater harm) would lead to questions that precious few have posed; such as:

What if a teacher’s life was threatened by a student? Would we be as equally supportive of a teacher saving her own life if it was a student not an outsider trying to take it?

What if a student’s life was threatened by another student? Would we support a teacher who used deadly force to save the life of a student, if the threat came from a fellow student and not an outsider? Or would we call the teacher a murderer because she didn’t “manage” the class better?

Or, just as problematic, what if an armed teacher made a judgement call and didn’t discharge a weapon in a violent struggle between students, and as a result a student died?

Would we support his/her judgement call, or would we try to bring them up on charges for being “accountable” for a student’s death?

Are we even remotely prepared to have the level of honesty required to have such discussions?

cris

January 8th, 2013
9:52 am

I’m a gun owner and a teacher…NO WAY I would consider carrying to school. Most school have sound safety plans and most faculty and staff know that you can’t account for everything. If the shooter happens to be familiar with the school (is a student and participates in drills and might even have knowledge of the SRO or other gun carriers) they will know who to eliminate or avoid first. There’s just no way to plan for every scenario, but more guns seems more crazy to me.

Private Citizen

January 8th, 2013
9:53 am

Scripted? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QNfesyWUeZk#

DunMoody

January 8th, 2013
9:57 am

Yes.

mystery poster

January 8th, 2013
9:58 am

To add to Beverly’s list of “what ifs”
What if the armed administrator fired at an intruder and killed an innocent bystander?

Private Citizen

January 8th, 2013
10:06 am

PSYOPS or Psychological Operations: Planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals. The purpose of psychological operations is to induce or reinforce foreign attitudes and behavior favorable to the originator’s objectives. Also called PSYOP. See also consolidation psychological operations; overt peacetime psychological operations programs; perception management. (Source: U.S. Department of Defense) http://www.military.com/ContentFiles/techtv_update_PSYOPS.htm

indigo

January 8th, 2013
10:14 am

“but local boards and the state don’t have the money”

And this is because they are corrupt to the core and value the enrichment of their own personal estates FAR above the lives of our school children.

Retired from Teaching

January 8th, 2013
10:15 am

As a retired teacher, I agree with Lynn and Beverly.

I worked under numerous administrators and only 3 of them had any real idea of sense or decency. The last bunch I worked under were the absolute worst. Teachers were on the absolute bottom of the heap in that school and students were allowed free reign to do whatever they wished to do. If a teacher accused them of something, the TEACHER was investigated, not the student. I saw it over and over again.

In that building, if a student had a gun to the head of the teacher, the teacher’s motives (trying to live) would have been questioned. They would probably have been suspended and their pictures plastered all over the local news. It would have been positively frightening what an armed administrator would have done in that situation.

Concerned DeKalb Mom

January 8th, 2013
10:24 am

@cris and @Beverly…two of the best reasoned responses to this issue that I’ve seen.

William Casey

January 8th, 2013
10:29 am

OK. Armed guards in every school! Simply moves the problem to day care centers. Arm them, too?

HRPufnstuf

January 8th, 2013
10:31 am

Would you risk your life to protect your child? Then what makes you think administrators wouldn’t do the same to protect their students? And they’re probably capable of much more rational thought, even under pressure, than the crazy that came to kill. Or would you rather that they just become additional victims?

Private Citizen

January 8th, 2013
10:33 am

I suggest that at the very least this “should schools have armed administrators” is propaganda intended with an agenda of incoherence put upon the public. The whole major media echo-chamber (owned by 4 corporate behemoths total) is singing the song of this absurd idea.

Note: Ronald Reagan removed the anti-trust laws that used to protect the public from centralised corporate ownership. In 1975, there were 1618 telcos (telephone companies) in the United States. Today, Comcast (one company) owns both the lines and the service for much of Georgia.

Centralised ownership = information echo chamber, same message repeated by few who act as many. What is the purpose of this agenda of incoherence? -Keeping the public occupied with arguing / debating absurd ideas and bypassing reality.

Private Citizen

January 8th, 2013
10:36 am

Armed administrators and a few guns locked up in closets will not protect from a military-grade hit job done by professionals.

Teacher Reader

January 8th, 2013
10:37 am

As a former teacher, there is no way that I’d ever go back if administrators or other teachers were able to run around with guns without the same course work and testing of a cop and even then I’d be a bit nervous. If you want armed guards with police/military training in the schools that is one thing, but not teachers or administrators. Having been attacked by parents who were gang members as a teacher, would I have been justified to shooting them if I felt threatened or would I only be able to draw the gun when another gun was shown and visible. There are too many unanswered questions.

Many of our schools already have security officers. I am not sure their training, but they are paid on par with teachers, so if they don’t have training of a police officer, they need to go and ex-military or police officers need to be hired who have training, skill, and no emotion in the building.

I am an ex-teacher who has guns and LOVES going to the range to go shooting, so I am not anti-gun. There just haven’t been many administrators or fellow teachers that I’d trust with a gun around children. Teachers and administrators are already over burdened with having to get extra hours to keep certification, having them get time in on the gun range or with gun use will add to this, and I am not sure that either group really has time, if they have a family and an outside life from the classroom/school to meet their certification requirements and that of properly having a gun in our schools.

Cindy Lutenbacher

January 8th, 2013
10:40 am

Seems to me that folks are asking excellent questions here. I keep thinking about the parking lot scene in which Rep. Giffords was injured and six people were killed. What if even a fourth of those attending had been carrying guns and decided to try to take down the shooter? I fear that the massacre of six people would have been tripled or worse. Most bullets from police officers’ guns go astray, and police officers are trained for just such situations and face stressful situations all the time. A day workshop in gun handling wouldn’t come close to what officers receive in training, right?

Old South

January 8th, 2013
10:45 am

One effect armed guards at schools will have on deranged American citizens who increasingly wish to shoot everyone, is that the deranged citizens will stop targeting schools and instead find some other place where people are vulnerable. Kids are often at other places, in groups, and these places will become the new targets.

The United States is simply a deranged country full of mad citizens (and mad institutions and mad business) with unlimited firepower.

Concernedmom30329

January 8th, 2013
10:46 am

Cindy
There was someone armed at the Giffords event. They later said they couldn’t/didn’t shot because of the chaos.

joe

January 8th, 2013
10:47 am

Unknown, but at least they’d have a better shot, no pun intended, of stopping said gunman, than an unarmed administrator…

The Deal

January 8th, 2013
10:49 am

I’m with Beverly. There are too many situations that aren’t as clear as “armed gunman comes into your class”. Policemen who are trained for these situations make mistakes. Do we really want to put teachers or administrators in the position to make mistakes with students’ lives? Our schools have a hard enough time doing their primary job of educating students. They do not need this extra burden. If you are having to arm teachers and administrators, you are admitting your school is not safe as it is anyway.

Inman Parker

January 8th, 2013
10:53 am

I have worked in schools for many years, and I assure you that arming teachers/admninistrators is INSANE! That is not the answer. The answer is a fundamental change in our violent culture that glorifies mayhem at every turn.

Don't Tread

January 8th, 2013
10:59 am

Well if they’re walking in there expecting/wanting to die, I’m all for speeding up that process.

Spartacus

January 8th, 2013
11:06 am

Interesting to note that the private school Obama sends his kids to have at least EIGHT armed guards….

Timmy

January 8th, 2013
11:09 am

Will failing to arm administrators insure that more children are killed?

There are no magic answers.

Centrist

January 8th, 2013
11:10 am

The idea is to thwart the threat more than stop it with deadly force. Weapon free zones become enticing targets because they are defenseless.

Knee jerk “zero tolerance” and disarming honest folks is counter-productive as we have witnessed. It will probably take many more innocent lives to be taken before rational defense comes into vogue.

Teacher Reader

January 8th, 2013
11:11 am

@ Spartacus

What’s even more interesting about the Obama girl’s school is that Sidwell Friends is a Quaker School and Quakers don’t believe in violence.

jess

January 8th, 2013
11:14 am

I do not see the problem with law officers in each school. I live in a small county and town in North Ga. The entire county has one high school, two middle schools, and two elementary schools. I recently found out in our local newspaper that each school has always had a full time officer from the sherrif’s dept. assigned to it. It’s a matter of priorities. I believe most schools could find at least one of their numerous administrators who would not be missed if replaced by an officer.

Private Citizen

January 8th, 2013
11:14 am

The United States is simply a deranged country full of mad citizens (and mad institutions and mad business) with unlimited firepower.

That’s what your supposed to think. Meanwhile, in Switzerland, every home has a rifle and is trained to use it. But they’re not “mad citizens (and mad institutions and mad business) with unlimited firepower.”

You seem to be playing into an agenda to prohibit citizens from owning “firepower” as you call it. I’m not a gun person, but I note online commentary from Russia saying that the removal of citizens guns was done there prior to when things really got terrible from the government. Not a nice thing to say, but the Russians say, the difference in free people and slaves is that slaves do not own guns. Anyway, your comment seems to be following the intended script. The whole “Newtown” thing makes little sense. We’ve had a lot of seemingly rhythm trauma in the U. S., Ruby Ridge, Waco, Murrah Building, Oklahoma City (where the local sheriff found unexploded ordinance inside the building, 9/11 with every blew upwards and the people were told it fell down, and now this, complete with insta-packaged legislation change to go with it that will be used to occupy the media echo-chamber for months. Meanwhile, don’t forget the unique U. S. distinction among all countries: 1 trillion dollars in existent higher education debt. @ 6.5% interest, that’s 65 billion dollars a year in interest. Divide that by 300 million citizens, well it only averages out to $217. per person in the United States for interest only per year for the existent “college debt.” Point is, the media echo chamber is not talking about that, is it?

KIM

January 8th, 2013
11:15 am

@Lynn et al: Well, I am one of those “not bright nor ethical” as you write, Lynn. Of course, first, let me say I bet your administrators thought the same of you. However, I worked with lots of bright teachers and certainly bright and ethical assistant principals. (Don’t forget, it was they who hired you, Lynn, right?) And, let me say we probably could have done nothing to prevent what happened in Conn. The administrators in my building were in classrooms or in an administrative meetings or doing discipline in their offices. They would most likely not have been in the front of the building. Well, take that back. At the time of announcements, I would have been in the front doing them. And I suspect that is exactly when the Conn. incident happened. but I cannot see me standing at the PA system packing. Something about that seems odd. Now, to protect the children, I say let’s be realistic and look at protecting society from those who are so mentally ill: effective gun control and mental health policy that works. Schools are no different than the malls, movie theaters, churches, etc. where people gather. They are all open to the same insanity. Right?

Retired Cop

January 8th, 2013
11:21 am

As a cop we went through extensive and follow-up training involving many scenarios with tactical concentrated options. We trained long and hard. We also went personal evaluated selection process. We know that good citizens are susceptible to having their weapons turned back on them and others. Having educators have only simple classroom training along with some firing range efforts, just do not prepare them for such dangerous horrid possibilities. They have wonderful educators minds but not the experienced cops mindset.. I pray for the educators who are so important decision makers, Hope you do as well. They won’t be prepared.

Sandy

January 8th, 2013
11:25 am

Schools should immediately remove doors to all classrooms, lunchrooms, etc and replace with bulletproof doors with very strong locks. And even if having armed trained people in schools ends up not stopping all lunatics from doing this, the fact that they may only be able to kill 10 kids before getting shot instead of killing 25 kids before shooting themselves is a win.

Negotiator

January 8th, 2013
11:28 am

The answer is possibly yes. It would be better to provide each school with an armed off duty police officer or one that is hired by the school system. Since this is not going to happen, it would be a good idea to allow for the administrator to be armed. They have a much better chance of stopping and armed intruder with a gun than with “deescalation tactics” utilized by the principal at Sandy Hook. The public hears about the situations like Columbine and Sandy Hook, but they never hear about all the near misses that occur daily in schools throughout the country.
School properties have teacher and visitors cars broken into frequently. Argumentative and unstable parents going through domestic disputes and custody situations involving their children make the school front office a tense environment sometimes.
Schools are a potential death trap for a deranged individual and they are a very permeable environment to the surrounding community.
Changing the culture to one where even a deranged person knows that the likelihood of his intent to hurt others would be met with equal force would make that person reconsider their actions.
Every employer in downtown Atlanta of a large volume of people has an armed security guard at the entrance of the facility at the front desk. So they are not forced to work in a “gun free zone”.
I would bet that the AJC, a company with a pro gun control stance provides 24/7 security with armed guards for all of its employees. In fact, I bet employees working late can request an escort by one of these “armed” guards to the parking lot!
Many of the readers of this blog are employed and work or conduct business in facilities that provide security with a gun toting individual. Have you visited your local bank lately!
So why wouldn’t we want to offer the same safety and security for an environment that has 50-100 employees(faculty and staff) and 450 – 1500 customers (children), not to mention the coming and going of 50-150 parents, service contractors, and outside agencies daily.
Parents have to re-frame their thinking about the schools they attended as children and help empower their local school to become safe.
We live in a different era and schools need to be treated as truly “safe zones” and afforded the same protection as all businesses.
Arming the administrators is a suitable alternative to change that culture.

Dr. Monica Henson

January 8th, 2013
11:31 am

I don’t believe that arming administrators or other staff is advisable inside the building. It would take very little time for students to figure out where the weapons are kept, and even less to figure out how to get to them, for theft, pranks, and worse. However, I do think we need to allow those licensed to carry to keep firearms locked in their vehicles in the employee parking lot. I also am of the firm conviction that every brick and mortar school in this country needs to have a trained law enforcement officer (School Resource Officer) armed onsite.

Prevention is the best way to deter. Making classroom doors less penetrable, similar to what has been done on airplane cockpits, is one step. School cultures where kids feel connected to adults is another–if students hear any rumors, they should feel comfortable notifying a trusted adult, who then refers it immediately to the administration and SRO. The Columbine situation was a powder keg waiting to be lit, with numerous huge red flags that were ignored by the adults.

living in an outdated ed system

January 8th, 2013
11:40 am

I think this is bad policy, period. There should not be guns in schools. The mayor of Marlboro, NJ, a town near where I grew up, has become one of the first locations to approve armed security at all of its schools. And this is a VERY upscale zip code! I’m sure my views are not popular in this state, but I don’t believe that more guns will prevent catastrophes such as what we saw in CT last month.

Shark Punch!

January 8th, 2013
11:53 am

“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.”

So the fact that the shooter’s mother worked at the school had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with his choice of target? *headdesk*

Dr. John Trotter

January 8th, 2013
11:56 am

I have been advocating arming certain school personnel. I wrote about this a few weeks ago on my personal blog and was interviewed about in on 11 Alive News. To do otherwise is to bury your head in the sand. We protect politicians, athletes, et al. Why not our children? We live in a different world these days. Twenty years ago, who heard would have thought about such invasions of schools…or home invasions?

You cannot expect the staff to sit around and holding hands and singing nursery rhymes as the children and colleagues are murdered.

http://www.georgiateachersspeakout.com

paul fisher

January 8th, 2013
12:19 pm

I would like one or more armed personnel in my kids school, it’s the only time I don’t have control of his safety.
Anyone who says they’d remove their child from an armed school is living in a fantasy land, crazy people know where the gun-free zones are, that’s why they hit them, i.e. Batman movie / CO.

Retired from Teaching

January 8th, 2013
12:21 pm

@ John Trotter I normally agree with you, but I can’t in this instance even though I personally own several hand guns and regularly go practice target shooting.

The reason I can’t agree with you is because some of these spineless administrators will do ANYTHING to avoid addressing a problem even when it is right there in front of their face. And when they do? They blame the teacher for whatever the problem is FIRST.

Give these people a gun? Are you kidding me?

cris

January 8th, 2013
12:41 pm

@spartacus..I think it’s SOP that the children of the current president are assumed to be “likely targets” and that all of them are protected by Secret Service or armed guards….as have past presidential children…..

catlady

January 8th, 2013
12:50 pm

Our administrators rarely would be the first to encounter a gunman. Better arm the secretaries and janitors!

HS Math Teacher

January 8th, 2013
12:53 pm

I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that a very small percentage of Teachers, and/or Administrators are already packing heat, conceled in brief case, or a closet.

ylojkt

January 8th, 2013
1:09 pm

I agree with Private Citizen, I think these attacks are being planned at worst, and exploited at best, by our government in order to reduce and control the amount of firepower we have access to for our defense against those who would potentially harm us, including our own government.
Notice how the Bushmaster was used in Newtown and dragged all over the news, then one week later you have the firemen attacked in New Jersey with the exact same weapon? A weapon “owned” by a felon who couldn’t purchase one and lived with his mother, who somehow had a neighbor willing to buy the acknowledged crazy, violent man next door such a weapon.
Notice the Aurora shootings, where you have the police on their radios describing multiple shooters, you have photos of bloody gas masks outside the theatre far away from where Holmes was found, you have eyewitnesses describing different scenarios than what is the official report, and the police and FBI providing the same story about one single shooter after the fact when evidence clearly shows an accomplice. Then James Holmes shows up in court drugged out of his mind and we’re supposed to accept this as due process? We’re not allowed to hear anything directly from Holmes, whose fathers’ and his career ties to US Intelligence agencies experimenting with mind control are not even mentioned in the media.
This is all too fishy, yet we keep getting the same type of actors on TV in all of these incidents using similar phrases and wordings to promote fear and anxiety in the populace.
It is my opinion these are false flag operations to limit our freedoms as US citizens.

Grumps

January 8th, 2013
1:18 pm

@Inman Parker

You may have the answer.. Now, what is the answer for next week? Next year? 2020? Because I don’t think we’ll accomplish your goal in a generation or two.

Regarding guns in the schools — I trust me to take care of me more than I trust anyone else. I don’t trust security guards to keep me safe. I don’t believe police can protect me — they can’t be everywhere. I don’t trust lawmakers. I trust me. I also trust me be responsible with my firearms — I’ve not had to draw a firearm except on the range — yet. I will protect myself using appropriate means — including shooting the bad guy if I have to. So I don’t want to give up my gun when I step onto school property — I not only have the right, I have the responsibility to take care of myself.

Surely, out of an entire school, there is an adult who is as responsible as I am.

Concerned DeKalb Mom

January 8th, 2013
1:24 pm

“Weapon free zones become enticing targets because they are defenseless.”

I have heard this argument repeatedly since Sandy Hook. But I find it a ridiculous argument.

In my opinion…
The students in Columbine didn’t choose a high school because it was defenseless.
The Sandy Hook shooter didn’t choose an elementary school because it was defenseless.

There are complex reasons why people do what they do, especially when it involves mass murder. Would a person with a weapon in those situations have decreased the number of casualties? MAYBE.

Here is an important question…are the numbers of children who would be protected in a mass shooting situation by teachers/administrators with weapons in a building worth the possible casualties caused by teachers/administrators with weapons in a building (a la Beverly Fraud’s questions above)?

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.