10

School shooting. Is it time for armed security on all campuses?

Posted by LetsShrug 12 years, 4 months ago to News
320 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

The school shooting at an elementary school in CT yesterday is particularly unsettling to me, as I work at an elementary school and most of my day is spent in the Kindergarten classrooms working with 5 and 6 years olds. I am not, however, one of those who are saying that something like this happening is "unfathomable". I'm probably viewed as being a little on the paranoid side among my peers because I always jump to the extreme when anything seems a little off kilter.

For example, a few weeks ago I heard office staff talking on the radio that the overhead system (speakers) weren't working for some reason and I immediately grabbed a few extra radios and passed them out to teachers saying, "keep this on your person until the overhead gets fixed", some looked at me perplexed until I explained, "What if somebody's tampered with our speaker system? If something crazy happens we won't be able to communicate...call me nuts I don't care just take a friggin' radio!" I got different reactions from them. Some were surprised with my train of thought and others were appreciative of my preparedness. The speaker system was quickly fixed and all was well.

Maybe I am being extreme, but when I see kids on the playground, or sitting in a classroom, it has crossed my mind that 'if some lunatic wanted to cause chaos here it could be easily done', but let's face it because it's true...as we have just seen, once again. I was at a Christmas dinner last night with my book club friends (almost all teachers) and eventually the school shooting topic did come up, although we had vowed to avoid it for the evening because it is so upsetting. We didn't talk about it for too long, but we quickly came to the conclusion that there is no real way to make a school "totally secure" from an intruder if someone is so inclined to intrude.

Sure, there are certain "security" measures in place, enforcing them is a priority, keeping the kids safe at all times is paramount (even to the extreme of not letting children 'chase' each other on the playground to avoid injuries...and I could write a book about all the bloody noses and head lumps that result from this practically daily because enforcing the "no chasing" rule on a playground with 90 kindergartners is just as difficult as maintaining a "secure school"...you do your best, but if they're inclined to chase, they're going to chase...they're 5 year olds and that's what they want to do).

I've been thinking about school security a lot this morning, watching the news etc. and the topic of having an armed security officer/cop on every campus has been brought up. (Gun control has also been brought up, but being a gun enthusiast and freedom lover and a believer in having a right to defend myself and my family I do not believe that adding more gun laws to the books will do a damned thing to stop lunacy.) So I'm wondering... is it time to privatize schools and add an armed officer to each campus? Or should some charter schools pop up offering this service on campus, giving parents a choice of sending their children to schools where they think their kids will be as safe as possible?

Sure, some parents would opt to not have their kids attend a school where there is a gun present ANY where on campus, even if it's holstered on a hip of a trained law enforcement officer and that's their choice to do so, but is it time to do this? Would public schools ever offer this? (I'm sure the unions would love it as they could collect union dues from an officer too), but it would work against their current gun control agenda so I'm not so sure really.

What say you?


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 11.
  • Posted by overmanwarrior 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That's right, we are here because we think, and have no illusions that evil, or bad activity can be regulated with yet another law. Politicians are such lost souls. They feel emotional, and feel they must do something. The issue of school shootings is much more complicated than gun rules. It's a social break-down more than anything.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If you have read Rand, you would know A is A, separate from God. Evolution is an incredibly powerful scientific theory explaining numerous biological facts on the order of Newton's Gravity. Evolution has three simple premises.
    1.There is a selection mechanism. Even a Creationist will not plant a Saguaro in Minnesota.
    2.Sex. You are not either your mother or your father. No one can deny there is combining and rearranging in breeding.
    3.Mutation and genetic expression. Recent understanding of DNA shows there is a "code" dictating organisms how to grow.
    Moral absolutes can exist without believing in God, and if one understands Evolution, as Rand points out, morality and ethics are the logical derivation of what is necessary for Man to thrive. Belief in God distorts one's understanding that A is A.(reality). To your example above, I present these examples: those who killed Galileo, the Inquisition, Witch trials, Jones massacre, Obamacare. All have or will kill in the name of "Faith"
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by flanap 12 years, 4 months ago
    I am so thankful that this forum is more inclined toward those that can think vs. emote.

    That being said, perhaps we can step up above the tangible solutions and think more about where this behavior starts (the behavior of the taking of innocent blood, then immediate subsequent suicide).

    Doesn't it start with the thinking? Why would the perpetrator's thinking be this way? Are we all capable of this, or only those we deem are "insane," or "mentally ill?" Are all those who take innocent blood "mentally ill?"

    I will say, and likely will get vehement disagreement, that since we are further and further from believing and acting as though there are absolutes, this type of behavior is entirely possible and accepted.

    What do I mean "accepted?" Well, when children are taught more and more that they evolved from primordial stew based on chance time and circumstances, then all we are is a bag of reacting and responding chemicals which means the setting of standards for behavior are societal and cultural and not from an extraneous source such as God.

    You cannot have it both ways. Even when Ms. Rand promoted objectivism, she stated the highest ideal is the value of man's ability to think and must always act in consistency with what his thinking lead him to. Well, doesn't that mean that if this perpetrator sought to destroy innocent blood as his highest ideal, isn't that okay? Who is to say that isn't okay, especially if we are just a bag of chemicals.

    All in all, you have to either believe there are absolutes, or not and if so, they cannot come from yourself because no one's determination of an absolute from himself can be applied to others since how is one to know what absolute is suitable for another and what is suitable right?

    Only absolutes come from God and when you start there and believe that man has the highest living value in this world because he is in God's image and only God, which is the Creator and can legitimately add or remove life, then you can begin to build a society who realizes that taking innocent life, no matter how many and how often, is (and may I be so bold to say it) simply wrong.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    someone posted a link to the FEMA camps. but I don't remember the coffin part. Let me just say, if I were running one of those camps charged with holding and losing dissenters, I would not need something conspicuous like a bunch of coffins. Sounds more like a setup for potential disasters. Except, even in that case, the coffins seem sort of useless. must be some crony tie-in with the funereal industry.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    it's kinda a duty thing for me. it makes it easier to stay in touch with friends and I like the pictures which you sometimes have to pry from family(I'm guilty of this) and just don't see from friends.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by itisntluck 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Good question. Another good question, why does DHS need 1 billion rounds of ammo and why are the FEMA camps going up across the U.S. stocked with coffins?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DragonLady 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree that strong (and loving) parenting is the best gift we can give our children, especially now when the Nanny Schools seem to be hell-bent on doing the parenting. I am not placing the blame on the parents in this case since I don't know all the facts. I can't imagine what kind of grief they must feel knowing that their child was capable of doing something like this.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    OOOkkkkkaaaay. This is the kind of talk about FB that makes me scream, "Ugh! Who wants this hoopla?" But thanks for the lesson in venn diagrams (which I had to google cuz I'm not a smart person). lol I think I get it...sorta. Seriously, FB makes me cringe. Ick.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    hello. you finished wrapping presents and making dinner. :) this is how it works. the movie has its own page. the page is divided up into left side content and posts. the right side (think of venn diagrams) is people and advertisers out there in FB land which are "liking" the page. they show up as a picture they post representing themselves. ads are farther to the right from that. so, I clicked on the link and immediately saw pictures of loved ones to the right. it took a nano second for me to adjust why just they were there. the moral of the story is: I need to get more friends (the family was already there) to like the movie page.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I have sons too and we took them to the range and taught them what real guns can do as well. Along with safety practices. However, they did have toy guns too. One is a toy and one isn't...no one was confused. My husband did mention today about violent games and movies desensitizing children. I'm of the school of thought though that if you're in a home where your parents are paying attention and involved and set a good example and just plain give a shit then outside forces won't have as much of an impact as it does if you're left unsupervised and not cared about. Stellar parenting is on the decline I fear. (I'm not placing blame on the parents in the latest case, from what I understand there are all kinds of personal complications with this individual and making any sense of this will probably never happen.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Legalize drugs, I don't care so long as I don't have to fund ANY part of a person's addiction, medical bills, re-hap, therapy, or burial costs. I won't infringe on their rights to abuse their bodies so long as they don't infringe on my right to keep my own earnings. :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm so out of the FB loop I don't even know what you mean by saying your whole family was at the right....and they "liked" what page??
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by terrycan 12 years, 4 months ago
    Allow teachers to arm themselves. The Gun Free Zone policy is a failure. Please check out my post under politics.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I concur with Prohibition.. Although many in here don't like what I'm going to say, I believe legalizing drugs would make a huge difference in border and below border crime.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    cuz you so love FB.
    seriously I'm getting old too. I clicked through the link and my whole family was at the right. it startled me and then I realized they all " liked" the page.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DragonLady 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Guess I've been out of school longer than I thought! :-D I think part of the problem is the graphic violence in movies, music, and video games our kids are exposed to. My kids (now 45 and 42) received .22 rifles on their 10th birthday, were taught how to use and care for them and were taken on a hunting trip with responsible adults when they were 12 so they would understand that when you shoot a living thing it dies. They were NEVER allowed to have toy guns because I wanted them to know guns are NOT toys! We have created a society that is numb to violence until it hits home, as this latest tragedy has shown.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't mind whatsoever...just made me scratch my head and wonder.... (C'mon, I'm getting old...I don't need to feel like I'm more forgetful than I already am.) Mystery solved tho...No worries Scott. :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, privatizing schools would be the answer, and being your own defense I agree with as well...however, that's not how the schools operate at present...so until schools, and teachers are "allowed" to do so....shouldn't armed guards be an option? I think it would do wonders for safety as well as the second amendment actually. And if some parents absolutely do not want such high security levels at their kids' school then they can attend a non-secured location. (Wait til parents have to make THAT choice.) Interesting...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ekr990011 12 years, 4 months ago
    The real choice should be for private schools which should be all schools today. In which case the private entity has the right to have armed security guards on campus. When we talk about Government public schools it opens the debate to allowing students and teachers to be their own defense through our second amendment. I feel like putting armed security guards are not needed I guess. Teachers and students who are of age can protect and deter these kinds of incidents from occurring themselves.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 12 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Maybe in the front office under the secretaries desks, but teachers are rarely sitting at their desks (I can only speak from what I see at my school). Some teachers have even removed their desks from the classroom to have more teaching space. They prefer to work at horseshoe shaped tables so it can dual purpose as a small groups round table. Teachers (in elementary schools anyway) or on their feet moving around the room almost all day long. Maybe desk buzzers in high schools would be more practical, but where would the buzzers buzz to? By the time the police arrive the damage is done. An armed guard on campus would respond quicker, but that could be done with a radio which is more practical because its mobile and could be carried around on your person (I always have one), where a buzzer button is fixed in one location and may not be reachable in the event of an emergency.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo