Texas school district to allow teachers to carry

[Atomic Dog]

Nobody wants to arm all teachers. I feel that people who carry should be allowed to carry everywhere. I would be very comfortable carrying in the classroom and school and don't see where size has much to do with it. Nobody would know who is armed until the time counts. As for the shoot/no-shoot decision it's the same as everything else.

[Sharpshooter9x19]

Originally Posted by Swarner793

Well said, but I would go even further and state that teachers have a duty to protect the children. If they want the paycheck, then it is part of the job. I know it is not possible to have this view widely accepted by the sheeple or the government. Imagine if the Teacher Certification process required firearm training and maintaining a firearm proficiency. WOW, this could be a turning point...stay with me...if carrying a firearm was REQUIRED of teachers, hmmmm. You would get rid of the hoplophobes and anti-gun teachers. Then you would have individuals that hold the traits of personal responsibility, self reliance and rugged individualism instructing the children, hmmm, imagine...


Be safe.

Scott

I believe in Israel It is a requirement to be a teacher...They are all armed in classrooms. I don't see a problem with it as long as the training is standardized, thorough and conducted by Marine PMI's. Semper Fi!

[WhiteFeather]

This school Superintendent David Thweatt has got his act together.

Read all of the sheepeople comments and FEAR mongering……..

Texas students pack bookbags; teachers pack heat
By ANGELA K. BROWN, Associated Press Writer
Tue Aug 26, 4:19 AM ET



Along with normal first-day jitters and excitement, students in this tiny district started school Monday wondering which teachers might be toting firearms.

"It was kind of awkward knowing that some teachers were carrying guns," said Adam Lira, 17, a senior. "I don't feel like they should be, 'cause we already have locked doors and cameras. But I didn't feel threatened by it."

Several parents said they had no idea that employees of the K-12 school were allowed to carry concealed guns on campus until recent publicity about the school board's policy, approved quietly last fall. They said they were upset that the rural community near the Oklahoma border had not been able to give input.

While some parents said they felt their children were safer, others opposed the plan, which appears to be the first of its kind nationwide.

"As far as I'm concerned, teachers were trained to educate my children — not carry a gun. Even police officers need years of training in hostage situations," said Traci McKay, whose three children are among the 110 students in the red-brick Harrold school. "I don't want my child looking over her shoulder wondering who's carrying a gun."

But Harrold Superintendent David Thweatt said the board approved the policy in an October open meeting that had been publicized. He said the decision was made after nearly two years of researching the best school security options at the school, which is just off a busy highway and 30 minutes away from the sheriff's office.

"When you outlaw guns in a certain area, the only people who follow that are law-abiding citizens, and everybody else ignores it," Thweatt said.

The superintendent said some of the school's 50 employees are carrying weapons, but he wouldn't say how many. When pressed further, he first said that revealing that number might jeopardize school security. He then added that he considered it to be personnel information and not a matter of public record.

Each employee who wants to carry a weapon first must be approved by the board based on his or her personality and reaction to a crisis, Thweatt said. In addition to training required for a state concealed weapons license, they also must be trained to handle crisis intervention and hostage situations.

State education officials said they did not know of any other Texas schools allowing teachers to carry guns. National security experts and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence said they did not know of other U.S. schools with such a policy.

School districts in some states, including Florida and Arizona, have closed loopholes that allowed guns on K-12 campuses. Utah allows concealed weapons at public universities but not at primary or secondary schools.

Thweatt said the board took extra precautions, such as requiring employees to use bullets that will minimize the risk of ricochet, similar to those used by air marshals on planes.

"I can lead them from a fire, tornado and toxic spill; we have plans in place for that. I cannot lead them from an active shooter," Thweatt said. "There are people who are going to think this is extreme, but it's easy to defend."

Judy Priz, who has a third-grade daughter, said that "everyone I've talked to thinks it's great." She said she trusts the teachers with her child's life.

"Look how long it takes the police or anybody else to get here," she told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram for a story in its Monday online edition. "If someone wants to come here and harm someone, at least we would have sort of defense."

Gov. Rick Perry has said he supports the policy because "there's a lot of incidents where that would have saved a number of lives."

The Brady Center has spoken out against the plan, saying it may not comply with Texas law, which bans firearms at schools unless carriers have given written permission. If the school board authorizes an employee to carry a gun, then that person must be a peace officer, according to the center.

"It's unfair of us to ask teachers to take on the additional job of being police officers," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign.

Cheryl Mehl, an attorney for the Harrold school district, said the statute the Brady Center cites applies only to security guards, not teachers and other employees. The district has no security guards.

WHAT has the Brady Campaign ever did to save one life?

If only passing "a law" would stop someone with evil intent, why have their anti-gun laws all fail, yet the Brady bunch lobby for another stupid anti-gun law which would do what that the other didn't do?

Why in ALL of their public polices and statements do they NEVER focus on the human criminal element as the problem, ONLY GUNS are always the problem according to Brady Campaign.

If anything there anti-gun policies and lobbying efforts have cost lives by creating victim disarmament zones, shouldn't they be held accountable?

Shouldn't the Brady Campaign be held liable for all the normal law abiding gun owners lives that have been ruined because there stupid anti-gun laws were misapplied to non criminal intent, just a technical violation of a law created for criminal actions ruins people lives.

WHAT makes there antigun comments so important to any subject that they always get there name in the paper anyway?

[Archiver]

Originally Posted by reichebrown

There is no time to second guess when the time comes to pull the trigger. I wouldn't want to be in a situation like that. I however am not opposed to armed security guards in schools.

Ok..... but there is TIME to call security and have them come in a life threatening situation? That would be the ONLY instance where you'd be using a gun! Its no different than dialing 911 and WAITING!

If the security guard can't even pass the exam to become a local cop do you think he has the intelligence that a college educated teacher has to apply life threatening force? I's rest a lot easier knowing my child was protected by his ARMED teacher thats milliseconds away from him in his class than some yahoo 3 floors away (or even 1/2 a block away at station) who has marginal intelligence at best!

Originally Posted by Sharpshooter9x19

I believe in Israel It is a requirement to be a teacher...They are all armed in classrooms.

God Bless the Chosen People! They are Wise and PRACTICAL!

[adymond]

Originally Posted by pennsyltucky

i dont think anyone is honestly suggesting that ALL teachers, right down to Mrs. Mousey in home-ec, be FORCED to carry a weapon. what i want to see, is that they be ALLOWED to do so if they choose. and as long as they can meet a few training requirements, i just cant see a negative effect here... reiche, you still can happily go about teaching as you always have, without carrying a gun. but i cannot come up with a reason to keep the teacher down the hall from carrying if he wanted to.

would you not feel better if you knew a few responsible teachers or staff in the building were carrying for the protection in case of a columbine/virginia tech type incident?

The only issue I have with your post is that you state there should be training requirements. This is something that was discussed in another thread (I can't find it though). Otherwise good post.

Originally Posted by Archiver

If the security guard can't even pass the exam to become a local cop do you think he has the intelligence that a college educated teacher has to apply life threatening force? I's rest a lot easier knowing my child was protected by his ARMED teacher thats milliseconds away from him in his class than some yahoo 3 floors away (or even 1/2 a block away at station) who has marginal intelligence at best!

Come on now. Not all security guards are mall ninjas. I remember seeing a thread here recently where one of our members is looking for armed security work. There are myriad reasons why one might pursue an armed security job. You had some good points about distance and such, but then had to make a broad generalization disparaging the intelligence of an entire group of people. Don't fall into that trap. That's the same kind of reasoning that is used against us.

[Atomic Dog]

Originally Posted by adymond

The only issue I have with your post is that you state there should be training requirements. This is something that was discussed in another thread (I can't find it though). Otherwise good post.



Come on now. Not all security guards are mall ninjas. I remember seeing a thread here recently where one of our members is looking for armed security work. There are myriad reasons why one might pursue an armed security job. You had some good points about distance and such, but then had to make a broad generalization disparaging the intelligence of an entire group of people. Don't fall into that trap. That's the same kind of reasoning that is used against us.

I agree,

However to be a teacher you have to attend at least 4 years of college including field and student teaching. You have to pass criminal record and child abuse checks, get fingerprinted, get a physical exam, pass exams in all subjects to be taught. You have to submit all the above to a state board for them to certify. And THEN you must maintain credit hours to keep that certification. Most teachers end up with a Master's degree through that process.


No matter what the background of the armed security teachers must undergo a LOT to get into the classroom. Add in crisis management training and firearms training and you have a good person to keep your kids safe. Why wait for an under trained guard to cross the school when the teacher is already in the classroom where he/she can react quickly and save lives.


I think the school thought this through and made a wise decision.

[Atomic Dog]

I was going to start a new thread but it makes more sense to add-on here.



The school year started on Wednesday and among the missing students only one was unexpected. We will call him "John Doe". Now last year "John" was always the most trouble. I can't recall him doing a single assignment, he spent most days sleeping. If he was awake he was disrupting class and fighting any authority figures. He was well known for being a local thief and would disappear for weeks on end, nobody knew where he was.


I am here to educate children bottom line. But it is impossible to teach someone who is unwilling. So needless to say we were not excited to have him back. If he doesn't want to learn that's one thing, bu to disrupt and prevent students that have an interest is quite another.


On Friday we got the call. Apparently over the summer he managed to get arrested.

• Grand larceny
• Offensive use of a weapon
• Firearms not to be carried without a license
• Not to be owned by a prohibited person
• Possession of narcotics
• at least one other drug charge

"Big deal" you say, this was over the summer outside of school. There is no doubt in my mind this person would have smuggled a handgun into school if he felt the need. I knew that last year and I am doubly certain now. In addition I often pass through his neighborhood on my way home. This news scared me. It is one thing to know that bad people are out there. It is quite another to interact with one on a daily basis only to learn his true limits.



I won't break federal law and school regulations, but I am re-thinking my options for other areas of my life.

[J8300]

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

Their gun laws are still more stringent than Pa.... But like Pa. they are working towards positive changes

Maybe in the OC case but in Texas as far as I know your car is an extension of your home and you dont need and LTCF to have a firearm in your vehicle. Other than that they are about the same.