Calling All Teachers!

Jump to Last Post 1-12 of 12 discussions (81 posts)
  1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
    brittneylindstromposted 6 months ago

    What are your thoughts on teachers having guns and why/why don’t you support it?

    1. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 6 months agoin reply to this

      I guess that teachers have the right to own guns just like anyone else, but in the classroom, I say no.

      1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
        brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

        I agree they deserve to have the same rights. Why not in schools? Just trying to gather opinions and views smile thanks!

        1. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 6 months agoin reply to this

          Ok,

          Even though there is virtually a gun for every American, the amount of gun violence in the face of that is relatively small and these school incidents are not common enough to justify educators bringing dangerous weapons into the classroom. I really believe that there is more of chance of tragic accidents/incidents with teachers having guns in classroom than the chance of a disgruntled student shooting up classmates.

          1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
            brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            Thank you for your honesty! I appreciate it!

          2. sky-hiscaffolding profile image62
            sky-hiscaffoldingposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            I agree they deserve to have the same rights. Why not in schools? Just trying to gather opinions and views smile thanks!

    2. promisem profile image95
      promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      I had a teacher who had a mental breakdown and had to be removed from her job.

      Such a teacher with a gun IN a school is more dangerous than a teen with a gun trying to get past security into a school.

      And the mental health of our teachers is declining:

      https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/201 … 811577001/

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

        Is it more dangerous than an insane person with a gun entering the school with the intent to kill?

        "Teachers" is a large enough group of people as to statistically apply to the entire country, don't you think?  What might we conclude from that, specifically in the area of gun controls?

        1. promisem profile image95
          promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

          As I pointed out in my post above, a teacher is already in a school. An insane person with an assault rifle is not unless the school has lax security.

          I went to a middle school the other day and had to be buzzed in. Schools need better security at the front door.

          They don't need a mentally unstable teacher with a gun.

          1. sky-hiscaffolding profile image62
            sky-hiscaffoldingposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            As I pointed out in my post above, a teacher is already in a school. An insane person with an assault rifle is not unless the school has lax security.

            1. promisem profile image95
              promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

              I agree with your point.

          2. mrpopo profile image72
            mrpopoposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            I'm not entirely familiar with American schools so this might be a stupid question - since you're concerned about teachers having guns inside schools, I'm wondering: what is currently preventing a teacher from bringing a gun to a school? Are there security checks? Metal detectors? And if those measures prevent a teacher from bringing a gun to school, why don't they prevent 'insane' people from doing the same?

          3. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            Do you really think an armed guard at the door will stop a killer with an "assault rifle"?  Because I certainly don't - at best it will result in calling police a minute earlier.  Not to say it won't stop any at all, but I do think the majority of those door guards will simply die with the children.

            What you're assuming is a total, complete security system, such as a prison has.

      2. brittneylindstrom profile image86
        brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

        I actually read that yesterday about mental health declining in teachers! Thank you for bringing that up!

        Yes, I agree it would be like forcing them to have blue eyes.

        What do you think some reasons are for the mental health decline in teachers? Stress? Overworked? Thanks everyone for being so responsive and replying!

        1. promisem profile image95
          promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

          West Virginia teachers are striking right now because they haven't had a pay increase since 2014.  The article below has more information.

          I assume teachers are also stressed that schools are a favorite target for mentally unstable people with assault rifles. The fact that Congress won't lift a finger to take action is troubling too.

          http://www.nea.org/home/12661.htm

          1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
            brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            Thanks for the link. I heard something about it but not very informed about it so much appreciated!

        2. sky-hiscaffolding profile image62
          sky-hiscaffoldingposted 6 months agoin reply to this

          I actually read that yesterday about mental health declining in teachers! Thank you for bringing that up!

    3. Readmikenow profile image96
      Readmikenowposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      Is it possible there are teachers who could be trained and responsible with a firearm in the classroom?  Is this possible?  I've known some pretty impressive teachers I've met at the shooting range.  So, yeah, some teachers should not have guns, but is it possible there are teachers who are mentally stable and professional enough to handle such a responsibility?

      1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
        brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

        I absolutely believe there are teachers who are mentally capable of having and carrying a gun because everyone is different. The problem I foresee is the mental stability of teachers (would they be tested, background checks) as well as students getting ahold of a gun.

        promisem you are right. They are already in a school and personally, I feel like school should be the safe zone, but things continue to be avoided rather than discussed or debated that nothing ever gets done.

    4. profile image79
      Hxprofposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      It's a great idea.  The vetting and training process needs to be stringent though.

    5. Rochelle Frank profile image95
      Rochelle Frankposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      I do not think any teachers should be required to carry weapons. I think the local authorities should make a local decision.
      If individual teachers have met authorized concealed- carry  regulations with approved training, and the local school district approves, it could be a good idea.
      It is a sticky problem. Many individuals who  go in to shoot up a school are on a suicidal mission and expect to die. Even in these cases, some lives could be saved by  responsible person with a gun.

  2. jordancollins profile image46
    jordancollinsposted 6 months ago

    Well, in my opinion it is suitable for regions, where crime level is the highest and the posibilitty of terror is on the top. So I don't think that we need this in all schools and other educational places. Well, yeah, my friend from https://writingsessay.com/coursework-writing/has a gun, because there are a lot of crimes in his city and he always go to his house late at night after work or additional lessons. So if you live in the dangerous place - better to have one

    1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
      brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      Thank you for your reply!

      Do you think it should be forced upon teachers to have one in school, even if they don't want it? Just curious!

      I'll check out the link now!

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

        That would be much like forcing all teachers to have blue eyes.  Not everyone is cut out to be able to kill to protect those kids.

  3. Amanda-Anderson profile image62
    Amanda-Andersonposted 6 months ago

    So, instead of mentally preparing teachers to educate their students, you want them to mentally prepare to shoot them? Teachers are not violent people (I know many). Imagine spending your entire training preparing to help others, only to find that once you do get a teaching job, you now have to prepare to kill or harm people? How about instead of arming teachers with guns, we arm them with books and school supplies? That might be a good start.

    1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
      brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      I'm sorry if I sounded like that was what I was saying but not at all what I meant. I was trying to say that if teachers are to be armed, would they have to undergo mental/physical health assessments and background checks?

      Also, I did spend my entire training and continue to train in the field of helping others. I have worked in some of the worst neighborhoods in Chicago and bad neighborhoods surrounding the city of Chicago and understand both sides of the argument.

      I can't imagine what teachers feel in many different situations but for the sake of this discussion, I can't imagine having to go teach after a mass school shooting let alone teach at that same school.

      I agree that they should educate their students, but at the same time I cannot ignore the increase in mental health issues in adolescents and teens. Approximately 1 in 5 aged 13-18 have OR will have a serious mental illness (https://www.nami.org/mwg-internal/de5fs … pQ,&dl).

  4. Amanda-Anderson profile image62
    Amanda-Andersonposted 6 months ago

    Brittney, I understand your argument and most counterclaims to my argument. I just hate that people think violence is the answer to violence. It's the teachers who are trying to show that love is the answer. I've been in a school shooting myself. Never would having more guns around me make me feel more at ease.

    1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
      brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      I'm with you on that one. The violence and hate has been severe and it's hard to stay hopeful that one day it'll be better.

      I'm glad you are here today, Amanda. I'm sorry you had to go through that. No one should ever have to experience it. It honestly makes me so sad that hate and evil can come so easily to someone but to love another seems difficult for some.

      If you ever need to talk about that or anything else, please let me know. I don't really have a firm stance on either side to be honest. I have to do more research about it. I don't think I would be at ease with more guns either. Both sides just can't have a rational and logical debate.

      Amanda, seriously, I'm glad you are alive today and I'm responding to you.

    2. Readmikenow profile image96
      Readmikenowposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      You are great at identifying the problem, that's easy, but not so great at providing a solution.  So, when the shooting starts, how do you propose to stop it? When someone, no matter what age, has a gun and is firing off rounds and killing students, what's the answer?  What are the innocent victims supposed to do as those around them are having bullets fired into them?  In the realm of reality, the only way to stop someone shooting people is for the shooter to be neutralized by any means necessary.  That is the reality of the situation.

      1. promisem profile image95
        promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

        Try to prevent the shootings by having better security that keeps the shooter from getting into the school in the first place.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

          "Try" being the operative word, and we all know it will eventually fail for there is nothing in this world that is perfect.  If there were prison inmates wouldn't have knives, shivs and stabbing tools. 

          When it fails, what then?

          1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
            brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            I just have to ask this because I really want to be informed. Is there a reason AR15s should or shouldn’t be legal/illegal?

            I’ve never been up close and personal with one.

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

              Not particularly.  They look mean and scary, they've been built up by media and legislators to be military tools (there is nothing military about them) but when it all comes down to it they are little different than a common semi-automatic hunting rifle.  A hunting rifle that is quite legal.

              There is the matter of the ability to use large magazines of ammunition, but when one considers that it takes only a second or two to switch magazines that doesn't seem so important, either.  The killer in Florida, after all, had some 7 minutes  and fired only around 100 shots.  At 2 shots per second that's less than a minute of actual firing, leaving 6 minutes to change out 10 round magazines...at about 2 seconds per magazine.

              There is also the wee matter that making a gun illegal means no one can legally own it, not that no one WILL own one.  With something like 8 million of them in the country (they are the single most popular gun in the country) it is inconceivable that anyone could possibly think a law is going to keep killers from getting one.

              1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
                brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                I’m starting to understand more and more. Thank you! It’s hard because news media are always one side or the other and hard to find objectivity. Thanks everyone!

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                  If you're interested I did a study of gun ownership rates vs homicide rates all over the world.  The results were unexpected enough that I wrote it up into a hub that is on my carousel in my profile.  You might take a look - it gives something to think about.

                  1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
                    brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                    I am absolutely interested! I love research. Is it on your page? I'm going to check anyhow smile

                  2. promisem profile image95
                    promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                    Odd that someone who attacks any opinion about Trump's mental stability because the poster isn't an "expert" on behavior is an expert sociologist who specializes in gun violence.

                    I'm sure that "study" is completely credible and unbiased.

            2. Readmikenow profile image96
              Readmikenowposted 6 months agoin reply to this

              Brittney, 

              I would like to suggest you contact a local gun range and speak with them.  Where I live, you can go to a range and shoot any type of legal weapon.  Once people shoot an AR 15, and are shown how there are some hunting rifles that take larger round and have the same firing ability, you'll begin to wonder about all the fuss.  The more you know and experience with firearms in a safe environment, the less people are afraid of them.  I call it real world experience.

            3. promisem profile image95
              promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

              Yes, because they are assault rifles designed with the purpose of killing people in war. But they are used to kill innocent children instead.

              The same is true of any gun modification that allows rapid fire and ammo magazines larger that what is needed for hunting.

              And since NRA extremists fight every step to bring the killings under control -- they care more about their guns than murdered children -- we have no choice but to ban them altogether.

              1. Readmikenow profile image96
                Readmikenowposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                Promisern,  You don't seem to have too much knowledge on guns.  You seem to have no knowledge about defensive gun use, which numbers in the millions incidents each year.  Many people are alive today because they were able to defend themselves with guns.  All you seem to be able to offer in these discussion is emotionally charged hyperbole. Have you ever shot a gun?  Have you ever gone hunting? Have you ever used a weapon during military service?  Have you ever been threatened by a gun?  Do you have ANY real world experience?  Does your experience on this topic consist of anything more than reading news on the topic on the internet?

                1. promisem profile image95
                  promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                  I have plenty of experience with guns. I have gone shooting many times on ranges, but not with assault rifles because I have no need for the blood rush.

                  Do you have any experience with mass murders? Were any of your children at one? Did any of them narrowly escape death? Did their friends get gunned down by someone who was mentally ill because NRA a-holes made it easy for him to get one?

                  Do you do volunteer work with people who are victims of guns? Have you spent tens of thousands of dollars on medical care for someone who was a victim of guns? Have you done ANYTHING to stop gun violence other than vent at people like me with your own emotionally charged hyperbole?

                  I have much more REAL world experience than you, hands down.

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                    I'd have to submit that having a child involved in a mass murder, having one narrowly escape death or see their friends gunned down, that doing volunteer work with people who are victims of guns, are NOT experiences that gives you or anyone else insight on how to stop such things.  They are great at providing motivation to try, but that effort is either made objectively, setting aside personal emotions and feelings as much as possible, or is almost certainly doomed to failure.  High emotions are not noted for producing rational, useful solutions to anything.

                  2. Readmikenow profile image96
                    Readmikenowposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                    Do you believe you are able to have an objective discussion on this topic? 

                    I don't have to volunteer with people who are victims of gun violence, I am one.  Trust me, I grew up in a very bad neighborhood.  I saw things growing up you wouldn't believe.  I will spare you the details.  I did not have a sheltered life.  That experience is why I believe so strongly in being armed.  Crazed A-holes on drugs find guns and have no problems using them.  Trust me, those people don't give a rip about any laws. 

                    I don't have a perfect solution, but you don't either. I know that demonizing the NRA is pretty weak.  Gun laws only punish the law abiding.  I know criminals do not care about laws and pretty much do anything they have to in order to get their hands on one. 

                    One guy who shot at me had two felony convictions and when they searched his home he had not one but two Tech 9s.  Guess what?  Those have been illegal for years.  Laws did not stop him from shooting people or getting illegal weapons.  One guy he shot didn't make it.

                    I do know the only way to stop someone shooting a gun at you is to neutralize them with a weapon.  That is a fact.  Preventing them from getting into a school is a good start.  Having a way to neutralize them should they get past security is an even better plan.

          2. promisem profile image95
            promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            Are you saying we should or shouldn't have better security at the front door of our schools?

            Let's focus on step one before we speculate on what might or might not happen afterward.

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

              "Let's focus on step one before we speculate on what might or might not happen afterward."

              OK - let's do that.  What do YOU think is the root of the problem with violence, specifically the urge and willingness to murder strangers innocent of any wrongdoing, in this country?  When we figure that out perhaps we can do something to reduce/eliminate it rather than simply trying to protect ourselves from it.

              1. promisem profile image95
                promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                Out of context. My second paragraph was referring to the first one:

                "Are you saying we should or shouldn't have better security at the front door of our schools?"

                What is your answer?

                1. promisem profile image95
                  promisemposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                  Still waiting for that answer.

                2. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

                  Sorry.  I guess that "step one" refers to treating symptoms rather than the disease.  A good methodology to follow if long term results are not the goal.

                  Sure.  I think increased security is one short term answer, in the hopes of hiding those symptoms away from sight and feelings.  Not as good as armed security (teachers) throughout the school, but useful until a killer decides to break out a window, back door or some other potential entrance and the copycats come out.

                  How many do you feel we should put at the front door?  One, to cover hundreds (thousands?) of people entering in the span of a few minutes?  Two?  More?  There has never been a mass killing inside a prison - should we armor and secure our schools as if they were prisons?

                  Do you think it will be effective if a half dozen, working together, decide to kill them some kids?  Or should we wait for more deaths and THEN decide a bigger bandaid is in order?

        2. profile image79
          Hxprofposted 6 months agoin reply to this

          Reality is that evil can strike virtually anywhere.  If we make soft targets just a little harder, it will cut down on the success rate for evil people intending to slaughter.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

            What do you consider "just a little harder"?  An armed guard like the one present in Florida, or something considerably larger?

            1. profile image79
              Hxprofposted 6 months agoin reply to this

              Whatever is, firstly, financially feasible.  Then look at the upsides and downsides to each financially feasible means of making schools "just a little harder", then act on with those measures that pass muster.

  5. Amanda-Anderson profile image62
    Amanda-Andersonposted 6 months ago

    Thanks Brittney smile

    1. brittneylindstrom profile image86
      brittneylindstromposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      I kind of wish there was a "like" button for that. But thank you for your input. I'm just trying to get views and opinions in hopes of writing about the different stances and counters to them.

  6. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 6 months ago

    OK - let's do that.  What do YOU think is the root of the problem with violence, specifically the urge and willingness to murder strangers innocent of any wrongdoing, in this country?  When we figure that out perhaps we can do something to reduce/eliminate it rather than simply trying to protect ourselves from it.
    ------------------
    Greetings, Wilderness and Promisem.

    As my research has revealed, there is not an uniquely American gene that explains why we are so homicidal compared with other developed countries.

    Oddly enough, the amount of crime per capita is not that much different in America than in other Western countries, so why all the death?

    The ease of acquiring firearms IS the difference. When guns are so easy to get, what criminal is going to not avail himself of the advantage? Much less hassle, even when taking a kid's lollypop, it easily reduces confrontation and argument.

    So, the crimes are still there like home invasion, everywhere, but in America there is pretty good chance that the criminal and the homeowner are armed leading to more than likely, a fatal encounter. That would not be true in societies where guns are harder to come by. Whenever there is a gun involved there is a greater chance that someone would be killed. We have plenty of the death dealing implements all around us, it is not that we are any more violent or peaceful than our comparable peers.

    It does not solve the issue of the viability of the 2nd Amendment in this day and age, but we need to understand the truth about the nature of guns, crimes, and death in America and how they interrelate.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      "As my research has revealed there is not an uniquely American gene that explains why we are so homicidal compared with developed countries. "

      Aw, come on Cred.  First, no one has ever made such a silly claim and secondly you are not a geneticist, qualified to examine the genetic structure of the world and find a "uniquely American gene" of that type.  It's not that I disagree with your "findings" but we both know they aren't any such thing and that you did exactly zero research on the question.

      "The ease of acquiring firearms IS the difference."

      Except for a couple of not-so-minor facts.  One would think that increasing the number of guns in a society will inevitably correlate to ease of obtaining one (do you disagree?) and there is no correlation between homicide rates and the number of guns in that society.  These facts don't fit well together, and even less with your assumption.  Pay attention here: I agree that the ease of acquiring firearms is A difference, but you have immediately jumped to a causal relationship, and one you cannot support.  Correlation does NOT mean causality, and in fact we know that in this case (given the assumption that large numbers of guns equates with ease of obtaining one, whether by theft, gift, or purchase whether legal or not) there is not even a correlation. 

      You're right - we have death dealing implements all around us.  So does every other advanced nation, so why do we have the murders and they do not?  You're trying to say that guns cause murders, and that simply cannot be supported.  Unless you think you can do so with something other than your opinion and a single, anomalous, data point on the graph?

      1. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 6 months agoin reply to this

        "As my research has revealed there is not an uniquely American gene that explains why we are so homicidal compared with developed countries. "

        Aw, come on Cred.  First, no one has ever made such a silly claim and secondly you are not a geneticist, qualified to examine the genetic structure of the world and find a "uniquely American gene" of that type.  It's not that I disagree with your "findings" but we both know they aren't any such thing and that you did exactly zero research on the question.
        ----------------------
        Of course,  there is no such thing as a American gene, I am elaborating on a point, the idea was not to be taken literally. And how do you know that I did not research the question, I did in an alternate thread with evidence but you chose to ignore the findings? There is a large population of people who hold guns in Switzerland, I am to assume that this means that guns are 'easy' to come by in Swiss society? Not really...
        ------------------------------------
        "The ease of acquiring firearms IS the difference."


        Except for a couple of not-so-minor facts.  One would think that increasing the number of guns in a society will inevitably correlate to ease of obtaining one (do you disagree?)

        Quite an observation, can you support it? That statement might not necessarily be true.

        What is your explanation? That somehow Americans are more intrinsically more violent than everybody else? And that with or without the gun they would kill in greater frequency and number? I don't buy.
        --------------------------
        and there is no correlation between homicide rates and the number of guns in that society.  These facts don't fit well together, and even less with your assumption.  Pay attention here: I agree that the ease of acquiring firearms is A difference, but you have immediately jumped to a causal relationship, and one you cannot support.  Correlation does NOT mean causality, and in fact we know that in this case (given the assumption that large numbers of guns equates with ease of obtaining one, whether by theft, gift, or purchase whether legal or not) there is not even a correlation. 

        I put forth a basic premise, in two difference societies where one prohibits the possession of knives and more dangerous weapons and the other society is proliferate in them, when there is crime, in which society is there likely to be severe or either fatal injuries resulting from crime? All other things being equal, of course. If it is not equal, tell me where and why not/
        -----------------------
        You're right - we have death dealing implements all around us.  So does every other advanced nation, so why do we have the murders and they do not?  You're trying to say that guns cause murders, and that simply cannot be supported.  Unless you think you can do so with something other than your opinion and a single, anomalous, data point on the graph?

        Where is your evidence that says that guns have virtually nothing to do with the high death rates as result of criminal activity in America?  You misread me, I did not say that guns cause murder, I say that the involvement of any firearm in any adverse situation makes death more likely than would otherwise be the case.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

          "And how do you know that I did not research the question"

          Because you are not a geneticist.  I said that.

          "I put forth a basic premise, in two difference societies..."

          I get that, and it is worth exploring.  The problem is that you didn't explore it, didn't produce the data, facts or statistics.  Just said "If I'm wrong, prove it", which does not provide any indication at all that you are right.  Making a premise that is then declared true without evidence is not the path to an answer.

          "Where is your evidence that says that guns have virtually nothing to do with the high death rates as result of criminal activity in America?"

          First, I never said it has nothing to do with "high death rates as a result of criminal activity": I said there is no correlation between the number of guns in a society and the homicide rate of that country.  Second, it's on a hub in my carousel, using UN data.

          But the biggest problem is your assumption, unproven, that the opposite is true.  My ignorance of what IS the cause, and yours, does not mean that you get to pick whatever you want, making it up as you go, as a substitute for knowledge.  You don't, and saying "all things being equal" does not mean that they are.

          This is the difference between using a rationale to make a conclusion and using factual information.

          1. Credence2 profile image80
            Credence2posted 6 months agoin reply to this

            Wilderness, In all fairness to you and your endless argument in favor of the proliferation of firearms, I will read your article, with a critical and discerning eye, so it had better be good. If the source and the argument holds water I will so state that to you. But if there is found a red herring, I will bring that to your attention as well.

  7. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
    Kathryn L Hillposted 6 months ago

    I am a substitute teacher. I will not hold a gun if I am around children. What if some stranger comes and grabs me from behind a steals my gun. What if a bunch of students come up with a brilliant plan to take the gun and hold ME up? just on a dare or to to be audacious?

    Kids don't seem to remember there are consequences.  Once, I walked past a group of high school students involved in a knifing. I did not see what they were doing and walked right past the situation. None of them called out for help! The kids doing the knifing were gang kids who had come to the school for whatever drama they were involved in. One of the children died as a result of his stab wound. In this same high school, a boy jumped off the third story and broke many bones. why? not sure. Another boy at another high school committed suicide by running off the rooftop of the highest building. He fell to his death. why? not sure, but at the time it must have seemed like a good idea.

    If you are a teacher, you know everyday some tragedy could occur.  You risk your life at any school. Everyone does. And we all take that risk.

    Maybe every single classroom should have a security guard. No security guard, no class. if thats what it has come to, in this country, I feel sorry for US. Its utterly pathetic!!!!

    I don't think Trump was serious. I think he wanted to point out the ridiculousness of the modern dilemma. He knows America's children from babyhood on have too much violence in their lives by way of violent killing in video games, computer games, movies and from the time they start school, if by some non-remote chance, they are labeled hyperactive, they are handed their Ritalin and Adderall medication by either parents or school nurses. When they go off what their bodies and brains have become accustomed to, they become psychological messes.

    The native Americans lived on this continent for eons of time. We need to confer with them. How did they do it? We need to blend civilization with what is nature / natural. We need to base our common sense on better science. We need to confer more closely, rather than than less closely, with
    God.

    A Mon Avis.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to- … d766fecc84

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      "I am a substitute teacher. I will not hold a gun if I am around children. What if some stranger comes and grabs me from behind a steals my gun. What if a bunch of students come up with a brilliant plan to take the gun and hold ME up?"

      What if the gun is defective and fires without a trigger pull?  What if you trip and fall, the gun pops out and fires from the shock of landing?  What if a book falls from the shelf, hitting and firing the gun?

      What if there IS no gun and a killer enters the room?

      The point is that there is danger in every step we take through life - the trick is to pick the path with less of it.  "What if's" are great to identify possibilities and work to eliminate them, not so great when they are used to simply avoid the topic.  Which path - carry a gun or do not - provides the most safety and least danger?  (And no, I would never suggest that all people are mentally equipped to carry such a tool.)

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
        Kathryn L Hillposted 6 months agoin reply to this

        (… probably not very many teachers.)

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

          Oh, I don't know.  The urge to protect the young is, if anything, stronger in women than men and there are more female teachers than male.

          Seems like the deciding factor is that the life of an insane killer is worth more than the lives of multiple children.  Or that the squeamishness of the teacher takes priority over the lives of her charges?

  8. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
    Kathryn L Hillposted 6 months ago

    Teachers don't WANT to carry guns. They don't want to have them anywhere around. We live in a civilized society!!!!!!!!

    1. GA Anderson profile image79
      GA Andersonposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      Maybe many teachers, or maybe even a majority of teachers don't want to carry guns Kathryn, but I don't think your blanket statement covers all teachers. I feel certain there are some that are competent, and comfortable with being an extra layer of security to protect their students.

      As for living in a civilized society... peel away a few layers of personal security and I think you will see just how shallow that "civilized" behavior really is.

      GA

  9. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
    Kathryn L Hillposted 6 months ago

    … we have to pretend then! what is up here?

  10. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
    Kathryn L Hillposted 6 months ago

    I would not send my child to a school where teachers carry guns.

  11. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
    Kathryn L Hillposted 6 months ago

    I am about ready to beam myself up. Who wants to even live in such a society as this has become?

    Its become a nightmare.



      No. I don't believe it.

  12. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 6 months ago

    Cmon, people, the idea of arming even a  percentage of teachers in school is a dumb idea. I just have to look toward Washington to find the source, don't I? Conservatives always see more guns as a solution to a problem like this.

    Conservatives always talk about 'useless' laws and ignores a deterrent nature of law, saying the law does nothing, but always go for dumb stuff like this.

    If a even percentage of teachers at each and every public school in the country had armed teachers, there would have to be more incidents of gun violence when compared against the statistically unlikely scenario of a homicidal maniac shooting up any specific class. The more guns in the schools (in anyone's hands) the better chance that there will be injuries. Simple accidental shootings, weapons going off unintendedly, or kids challenging teachers actually taking the guns away from them.

    America is an embarrassment, as the only industrialized society that has its grade school teachers armed. Yet, the rightwinger continue to say that the "gun" has nothing to do with this?

    Metal detectors and a security guard would, in the vast majority of circumstances, be adequate. Some conservative once mentioned that a single armed guard or cop would be ineffective against a perpetrator with a semi-automatic. But yet these 'teachers' would be instantly prepared to deal with a killer with such a weapon ?

    That is just my opinion, but that is just another reason that  I have little in common with conservative or their manner of thinking, which in this case, anyway is found wanting.

    1. Readmikenow profile image96
      Readmikenowposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      I really believe more people need to head to a gun range and spend time firing a gun.  All types of guns. Learn gun safety.  Then, you'd learn that having a gun is no big deal.  It's a shame that so many people who know so little about guns say such things.  Go to the firing range and spend a significant amount of time there.  Then you'll learn a gun is an inanimate object.  Put a loaded gun in a room and it's not going to shoot anyone until someone goes in the room.

    2. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      "If a even percentage of teachers at each and every public school in the country had armed teachers, there would have to be more incidents of gun violence when compared against the statistically unlikely scenario of a homicidal maniac shooting up any specific class."

      Such statements are always the better for proof, right?  I await your list of such incidents.

      "America is an embarrassment, as the only industrialized society that has its grade school teachers armed."

      And if the price of avoiding such terrible international embarrassment is a few roomfuls of dead kids, that's OK, right?

      "Metal detectors and a security guard would, in the vast majority of circumstances, be adequate."

      Again, such statements are so much more when accompanied with proof.  Would you give us your data and reasoning from that data?  You can start with Florida and the armed guard there...

    3. GA Anderson profile image79
      GA Andersonposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      Hey bud, want a witness to your opinion? On most of your points, I volunteer.

      GA

    4. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

      Credence, I couldn't find where you and I commented on media violence, but here is a link that is interesting.  I have no idea if there is any validity to it, but it DOES seem to me to be the kinds of thing we need to be studying instead of assuming a law banning fake assault rifles will reduce the killing rates.

      https://www.huffingtonpost.com/cris-row … 99218.html

      1. Credence2 profile image80
        Credence2posted 6 months agoin reply to this

        I wanted to publically compliment you regarding your article about gun control. It is well researched and documented and I have to back away from my previous argument regarding the subject, so let's now see what is next? You have another article on what you might consider as some of the causes of violence in this culture as you have pretty well shown that, looking around the globe, high gun ownership do not equate to high homicide rates. I will check that out and make comment as appropriate.

        I don't like any idea of censorship, as we lefties are very concerned about the sanctity of the 1st amendment, freedom to disseminate ideas and freedom of expression at least as much as conservatives are concerned about the 2nd Amendment. Tampering with this is making an opening for tyranny of the highest order

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 6 months agoin reply to this

          I left out the link!  I've edited my comment and put it in.  I repeat that I don't have a clue if there is anything to it, but that it IS the type of research we should be doing and that if appears true then is something we can address.

          Believe me, I don't accept losing rights, whether to free speech or anything else!  It's not that I'm a gun owner concerned I will lose my gun; it's that we're taking rights for no more reason than fear.  I'm (mostly) against the idea of mental exams for gun owners for the same reason - that is simply far more intrusion into private lives, and removal of personal rights and privacy, than I'm willing to consider.  Now if we had a crystal ball that would accurately and positively predict who would go mad and turn into a killing machine...but we don't, thus my (current) stance on that issue.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)