Armed teachers protecting our children in school are not in danger of being shot by the police. The police go in after the shooter(s)commits suicide and the wounded bleed to death. How soon we forget Columbine.
I am not sure it would be that hard to tell a perp from a teacher. The perp usually has the camos, vests, several weapons, ammo clips etc. Another thing that can be done is give the Police a picture of the teachers who are carrying so ID is easily done. My guess is that the shooting will be all over before the police arrive. The teacher that defended the kids will have done the police a favor by putting a bullet between the perps eyes.
“Anytime you arrive on the scene and you as a police officer are, you are taught and trained to look for anybody with a weapon,” McCraw said.
If this is true, why can’t the training for police officers be changed to co-exist with armed teachers?
If insanity is doing the same over and over expecting a different outcome when in reality there is no change, why can’t we do something different? The response gap was hours at Columbine and only a few minutes at Northern Illinois University, but the deed is done while victims wait for cops to arrive. Why wait?
I do not have a problem with arming teachers as long as they receive proper and thorough training including refresher training prior to the beginning of each school year paid for by the state. The point was to advise of a scenario where the police respond and the teacher could be mistaken for the shooter. It is called due diligence to consider all possible risks.
Just so we are clear, the definition of insanity is:
1: a deranged state of the mind usually occurring as a specific disorder (as schizophrenia)
2: such unsoundness of mind or lack of understanding as prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or as removes one from criminal or civil responsibility
3a : extreme folly or unreasonableness b : something utterly foolish or unreasonable
You are referring to Einstein’s personal definition of insanity.
I’m wondering how the insurance industry will respond to the personal liability these gun-toting teachers will assume by taking on the responsibility of protecting (or not protecting) a school. It’s certainly not the most important issue, but it will be an issue for those in our industry facing claims that WILL come, of one sort of another.
Armed teachers protecting our children in school are not in danger of being shot by the police. The police go in after the shooter(s)commits suicide and the wounded bleed to death. How soon we forget Columbine.
I am not sure it would be that hard to tell a perp from a teacher. The perp usually has the camos, vests, several weapons, ammo clips etc. Another thing that can be done is give the Police a picture of the teachers who are carrying so ID is easily done. My guess is that the shooting will be all over before the police arrive. The teacher that defended the kids will have done the police a favor by putting a bullet between the perps eyes.
“Anytime you arrive on the scene and you as a police officer are, you are taught and trained to look for anybody with a weapon,” McCraw said.
If this is true, why can’t the training for police officers be changed to co-exist with armed teachers?
If insanity is doing the same over and over expecting a different outcome when in reality there is no change, why can’t we do something different? The response gap was hours at Columbine and only a few minutes at Northern Illinois University, but the deed is done while victims wait for cops to arrive. Why wait?
I do not have a problem with arming teachers as long as they receive proper and thorough training including refresher training prior to the beginning of each school year paid for by the state. The point was to advise of a scenario where the police respond and the teacher could be mistaken for the shooter. It is called due diligence to consider all possible risks.
Just so we are clear, the definition of insanity is:
1: a deranged state of the mind usually occurring as a specific disorder (as schizophrenia)
2: such unsoundness of mind or lack of understanding as prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or as removes one from criminal or civil responsibility
3a : extreme folly or unreasonableness b : something utterly foolish or unreasonable
You are referring to Einstein’s personal definition of insanity.
I’m wondering how the insurance industry will respond to the personal liability these gun-toting teachers will assume by taking on the responsibility of protecting (or not protecting) a school. It’s certainly not the most important issue, but it will be an issue for those in our industry facing claims that WILL come, of one sort of another.