Potential armed teachers would be subjected to mental evaluation and training

[Bang]

Florida. Bill in consideration. If passed, volunteer teachers would be examined for mental deficits and receive 144 hours of training.

Got me to thinking. Shouldn't their mental faculties be assured, to begin with??

[DK23]

144 hours? That's more than I had at the police academy.

[JAKIII]

144 hours? That's more than I had at the police academy.

There’s no such thing as too much training when it comes to firearms. A lack of proper training is the biggest liability/risk for armed teachers.

[JenniferG]

Don't send your kid to school with a MAGA hat after teachers get guns.

[Berncly]

144 hours? That's more than I had at the police academy.

Seriously...
I don't know anyone that does 144 hours initial qualification training.
Why not throw in jump school while they're at it.

[JAKIII]

Seriously...
I don't know anyone that does 144 hours initial qualification training.
Why not throw in jump school while they're at it.

Respect to the LE commenting in this thread.

My concern would be more for those who’ve completed the initial qualification training (regardless of length), not participating in any follow up training, for example recertification on an annual basis. I realize I’m preaching to the choir, but practice and muscle memory are key ingredients in a tactical situation, such as an active shooter. An armed teacher who never visits the gun range for recertification is more of a liability than an asset.

[MARINE DIVISION TWO]

I had 5.5 months training when in the Academy back in the late 70s ! Mental evals should be considered as to mental awareness and any issues that could be not in the childrens best interest !

[buckengr]

Respect to the LE commenting in this thread.

My concern would be more for those who’ve completed the initial qualification training (regardless of length), not participating in any follow up training, for example recertification on an annual basis. I realize I’m preaching to the choir, but practice and muscle memory are key ingredients in a tactical situation, such as an active shooter. An armed teacher who never visits the gun range for recertification is more of a liability than an asset.

Respectfully, I understand your point, but I disagree that an armed teacher, regardless of the amount of follow up training, is a liability when you consider the expected value of lives lost when a mass shooter goes unchallenged. The liability is allowing a mass shooter to go unchallenged for 10s of minutes or more. Most shooters are cowards and run away or kill themselves when engaged. I'd wager almost any incoming fire stands to improve the odds on behalf of the defenders. Even if the teacher were to shoot a student in the process, the expected value of lives lost by not engaging would be worse, I would bet money.

The fact that use of lethal force is authorized to be used to defend students should be posted on the front door and the sign out front. That would have a serious deterrent effect too.

That said, more training/more frequent training=more better.

[Berncly]

Respect to the LE commenting in this thread.

My concern would be more for those who’ve completed the initial qualification training (regardless of length), not participating in any follow up training, for example recertification on an annual basis. I realize I’m preaching to the choir, but practice and muscle memory are key ingredients in a tactical situation, such as an active shooter. An armed teacher who never visits the gun range for recertification is more of a liability than an asset.

I agree with this.
LEO's generally re-qualify every 3 or 4 months, with various training mixed in whenever.
I think 10-20 hours initial training followed by 10 hours renewal once a year is reasonable to arm teachers or staff if preferable.
(LTCF) background check, (LTCF) licensing, training, qualification, and certification.
More or less the LEOSA formula I have been pushing for a long time.

[buxbandit]

The fact that they'll need mental evals is a bit unsettling. Shouldn't they already be vetted?