Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Oh, god I'm happy I live in Sweden. No firearms for random 18-year-olds, no firearms in public places if you're not a cop, not even a knife in public places if you don't have a good reason for it, CERTAINLY no guns in schools.

And guess what? NO SCHOOL SHOOTINGS. EVER.
And that's despite having large groups of minorities, before anyone comes claiming it's because of that.

I just don't like the sound of teachers having guns, even if its only the option of having one. They're hired to teach, not defend lives. This sounds like a job that school security officers would be able to handle more efficiently.

i don't know what teacher would have the balls to shoot a child even if the kid was on a rampage...

At 8/25/08 08:04 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: And guess what? NO SCHOOL SHOOTINGS. EVER.
And that's despite having large groups of minorities, before anyone comes claiming it's because of that.

the causes for school shootings seem to be much more social rather than simple access to weapons. here in Canada the rules are very similar to those described yet shootings still happen.

and as far as concealed carry goes it is highly unlikely there would be any place to store weapons at the school. the licenses were issued to those individuals whose duty it is to store their weapons safely and it would be extremely unlikely that those individuals would be allowed to keep a private weapon in a public place, even under lock and key.
i can only hope those who have the licenses understand that the purpose of having a concealed weapon and will know better than to talk about it.

I think it is a great idea.
I can't wait for it to turn out so wrong.
"Teacher shoots misbehaving student"

Its just Texas students, not like they really matter.

At 8/25/08 08:43 PM, Luxury-Yacht wrote: I just don't like the sound of teachers having guns, even if its only the option of having one. They're hired to teach, not defend lives. This sounds like a job that school security officers would be able to handle more efficiently.

Teachers are paid to teach, and if they have guns with them, they won't be paid to defend someone with it. Security officers have to be paid daily for something that might happen once in a school's lifetime. It's all about the government's finance. They won't choose to put that much money into school security.

At 8/25/08 01:06 PM, D2Kvirus wrote: To flip that one on its head, the teacher is armed in case a student snaps and goes on a killing spree. So, if a teacher snaps and goes on a killing spree, who'll be the one to protect the students?

Irrelevant. People aren't allowed to go on killing sprees, but they do it anyway. If a teacher wanted to go on a killing spree, they'd bring the gun in whether they were allowed to have it there or not.

At 8/25/08 10:05 PM, tkrow wrote:

Teachers are paid to teach, and if they have guns with them, they won't be paid to defend someone with it. Security officers have to be paid daily for something that might happen once in a school's lifetime. It's all about the government's finance. They won't choose to put that much money into school security.

A lot of schools (especially high schools) already have security, be it privately hired or from the local police department. Security can do more than just lend a hand during shootings, you know. They can handle fistfights, drug possessions, making sure random people aren't breaking the law on school property, etc. Teachers shouldn't be expected to handle all that shit.

Just to give an example from my school, the security walk around the stair wells and hallways to make sure that people out of the classroom have a reason to be and to watch for fights and stuff, I've seen them tackle kids who were fighting to restrain them, security definetly earns there pay. And in the Lunch room we have 2-3 cops and then some security becuase last year there were a lot more fights then normal.

Safety is really not something the teachers need to be worrying a whole lot about.

There was a similar thread about this, where I explained quite a lot on this matter. I leave it to you guys to find what I said.

It's terrible. But the teacher can play the gun like in The House Of Dead

lol i can see it happening at my school it will be full blown war :) but if the teacher can't aim they should not have a gun or anything

Well yeah I think it's a good idea. As if school shootings were discouraged enough, now fights will be too.

All those tough Vatos who'll switch from beating up a gringo for saying the wrong thing WON'T attack an armed teacher. If they're threatened, they have the right to drop their ass, so the Vato'll think twice before starting more trouble.

I think this is a good call. The more honest people with guns out there, the more discouraged the bad ones are.

At 8/25/08 10:31 PM, MrHero17 wrote:
Safety is really not something the teachers need to be worrying a whole lot about.

Hmm...maybe you're right. If they allowed the security to be armed, that would seem appropriate...in hindsight, I can't imagine my 70-year-old history teacher strapping a glock while she's reading out of the book.

Hell, if they carry around guns and they're senile or just plain irresponsible, the bad-kids could steal that shit out of their desks.

....This is a terrible idea....

Dammit Perry...Kinky Friedman should've won.

I consider it a possibility that a "gang" of students will team up on teacher, steal the gun, and go on a shooting spree. In all honesty, I can't decide whether it's a good idea or a bad idea. I mean, there are several pros and cons for each side of the argument.

Thank goodness I don't live in Texas.

At 8/25/08 11:25 AM, WritingPad wrote: I personally think it's a horrible idea, it doesn't take a second for the teacher to miss-place the gun, or it going off and hitting an innocent person.

Working backwards:

1) A gun just does not go off. If the safety is on and the hammer is down, then there is NO way that the weapon is going to just spontaneously fire. Don't believe everything you see in movies.

2) Guns could be misplaced. However, policy can effectively deal with this. If a teacher wants to carry a firearm then they should agree to wearing it in a concealed holster on their person at all times. Thus the gun won't get misplaced in a purse or backpack. Besides, not having it on you defeats the purpose.

In conclusion the reasons you think this is a horrible idea are false.

At 8/25/08 08:04 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: And that's despite having large groups of minorities, before anyone comes claiming it's because of that.

There are other variables that go into the minority question on crime. There are variables specific to the US that you do not have in Sweden that makes the US a seperate case.

1) History of slavery
2) History of Socio-economic segregation
3) Urban decay

Schools in these areas are poorly funded and are incapable of delivery a quality education that will provide for legitimate job prospects. Furthermore, a significant portion of the population having been brought up in this environment does not understand nor care for the benefits of education. This has resulted in urban environments where the only option for young black males is to go into the NBA or NFL or become a street pharmacologist and run with the gangs. In many of these urban settings there are feral centers where there is no police or government presence. The neighborhood/project is controlled by the dominant gang.

So then when you climb upon your high-horse and look down on us Americans and view this argument as "racist" or otherwise invalid, are you even incapable of seeing how wrong you are?

At 8/25/08 01:26 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 8/25/08 01:06 PM, D2Kvirus wrote: To flip that one on its head, the teacher is armed in case a student snaps and goes on a killing spree. So, if a teacher snaps and goes on a killing spree, who'll be the one to protect the students?

When was the last time we heard of a teacher going on a rampage and shooting up a school, though? Isn't it usually the case of teachers molesting and sleeping with students instead of shooting them you hear more often about?

Thomas Hamilton was a Scout leader before the Dunblane massacre - not a teacher as such, but a person in a similar position of trust with children.

There's also a case in India where a teacher beat a student to death (link), albeit that was out of school hours. But, trust the Chinese to top that by killing a student in school hours (link).

There's also something else that stands out: once the first shot has been fired, the student body will generally flee toward the exits - if the shooter sees a teacher running toward them, they're going to aim for them and, as they have their gun in hand, may well get a shot away before the teacher even draws their weapon, especially if they are running into the rush of people trying to escape.

it's also a dangerous precitent to say that a teacher needs to protect students from each other, as that could cause a lot of mistrust toward and within the student body.

We entrust teachers with children for 8 hours a day in school, why is it such a stretch of the imagination to then say that they are charged with ensuring their safety and well being as well? And WHAT would be your alternative solution to this issue besides standing around doing nothing?

Teachers are not trained to ensure the safety and wellbeing of their students - and I have the feeling that they'd want (actually, they should expect) a pay increase for this responsibility, and not get it - and that's a whole new can of worms.

WHat do I suggest? Easy, start with not selling firearms to those of High School age. Failing that, have better monitoring in place in regards to ownership of firearms - if a person has ownership of a firearm at High School age, send them to the nearest Military Academy or whatever. That way they are out of the student body, and therefore cannot cause harm to the student body, as they will be in a tightly-monitored environment.

(As long as they don't go Charles Whitman after they graduate...)

At 8/25/08 08:04 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: And guess what? NO SCHOOL SHOOTINGS. EVER.
And that's despite having large groups of minorities, before anyone comes claiming it's because of that.

Minorities? In Sweden? I'm intrigued...

WHat do I suggest? Easy, start with not selling firearms to those of High School age.

High school age, like the age when you're required to register for selective service, a full class D driver's license and are expected to act according to all rules set forth by society by being an adult?

Are you suggesting the logic they use for alcohol use prohibition pre-21 will extend to firearms and be a positive reinforcement model? I don't think prohibiting the ownership of firearms to this age group is a smart or legal way to curb insane, suicidal behavior.. which is the root of the problem.

Failing that, have better monitoring in place in regards to ownership of firearms - if a person has ownership of a firearm at High School age, send them to the nearest Military Academy or whatever.

Who would have the authority to make such a sweeping decision, and only based on their ownership of a particular item? That sounds alot like "send everyone wearing a yarmulke to one of our splendid work camps, where work sets you free."

That way they are out of the student body, and therefore cannot cause harm to the student body, as they will be in a tightly-monitored environment.

Your need for a parental state does not trump my constitutional rights.

You know from what I heard schools allowed kids to bring in guns for the longest time, they even had hunting clubs at school (no I don't have a source for this).

Even if though the chances for accidents are very unlikely and I can't believe people are worried about teachers shooting students. Have you guys seen these schools? They have cameras in almost every classroom so if a teacher shot a student there's be video evidence. And even if they didn't there would still be lots of witnesses the gunshot sound to consider and the dead body. Not to mention that police can trace the bullet back to the teacher's gun.

Yes school shootings are stupidly rare, but still it's a very cheap solution to the problem that doesn't involve monitoring the students like hawks or something like that.

Plus it's concealed carry, no need to worry about kids freaking out about the guns.

You think teachers with guns are bad? A Junior from a college in Colorado is trying to get STUDENTS to carry guns on campus (Concealed Carry-on Campus). True deal, too.

I think all forms of weapon carrying is a bad idea in my opinion. It all always leads to more violence in my opinion.

At 8/25/08 12:52 PM, Proteas wrote: and also acting as a deterrent by reducing the willingness of a shooter to go into a school (the success of a school shooting is predicated on the idea that no one will shoot back, remember?).

And what do you base this opinion on? Consider how the course of a school shooting tends to go:

Shooter enters school, seeks revenge on classmates and faculty, turns weapon on self.

If you ask me the fact that seems to indicate that these people expect to die, the presence of a teacher with a gun is hardly going to be a deterrent.

And I question your idea that you wouldn't trust a teacher who would be required to by the state to pass gun safety and other such training courses as applicaple by law to ensure your safety by carrying a firearm. Are you to tell me that you trust these teachers to keep you safe unarmed for 8 hours a day, yet wouldn't trust one licensed by the state to carry a firearm to keep you safe?

Absolutely not. The problem with your logic is that in order to defend to students with the gun it must be used or at least visible. So someone either has to be shot or threatened to be shot or else the gun is a moot point.

Fear of a negative outcome is the problem with this issue, as those involved are to afraid to take ANY step towards solving a problem to do anything about it, so they go nowhere. Cowards.

How about being proactive about the situation and getting kids some counseling before they resort to shooting up a school. Once an individual has decided to shoot up their school the number of teachers with guns is going to make very little difference.

At 8/26/08 03:56 AM, Phobotech wrote: Well yeah I think it's a good idea. As if school shootings were discouraged enough, now fights will be too.

All those tough Vatos who'll switch from beating up a gringo for saying the wrong thing WON'T attack an armed teacher. If they're threatened, they have the right to drop their ass, so the Vato'll think twice before starting more trouble.

Great. I can just see this playing out. Vato beats up Gringo. Teacher "drops his ass". Now instead of someone being beaten up we have a dead student. And likely a teacher going to jail. Awesome.

I think this is a good call. The more honest people with guns out there, the more discouraged the bad ones are.

And we all know honest people can never go bad right?

At 8/27/08 10:00 AM, TheMason wrote: 1) A gun just does not go off. If the safety is on and the hammer is down, then there is NO way that the weapon is going to just spontaneously fire. Don't believe everything you see in movies.

2) Guns could be misplaced. However, policy can effectively deal with this. If a teacher wants to carry a firearm then they should agree to wearing it in a concealed holster on their person at all times. Thus the gun won't get misplaced in a purse or backpack. Besides, not having it on you defeats the purpose.

In conclusion the reasons you think this is a horrible idea are false.

Perhaps. For sake of argument lets assume none of the guns will ever be defective, and the teachers won't ever waver from their gun safety obligations. What kind of influence do you think it's going to have on a teacher when some student pushes them beyond their level of patience. It's unlikely that they'll draw the gun, but much more likely that they'll think about it if they have the gun on them. And then give them a number of years of thinking about it and watch what happens.

if used and managed correctly, it could be a good plan. most cities are safer where the right to bear arms is used freely. probably wise to institue other preventative measures like metal detectors at the front doors?

I'm so happy knowing that teachers are packing heat, so that they could shoot each other in the cafeteria.

Hehehe, now male teachers don't have to slowly build a relationship of trust with young female students!

*rubs hands together and licks lips*

At 9/6/08 12:43 AM, ReThink wrote:

At 8/27/08 10:00 AM, TheMason wrote: 1) A gun just does not go off. If the safety is on and the hammer is down, then there is NO way that the weapon is going to just spontaneously fire. Don't believe everything you see in movies.

2) Guns could be misplaced. However, policy can effectively deal with this. If a teacher wants to carry a firearm then they should agree to wearing it in a concealed holster on their person at all times. Thus the gun won't get misplaced in a purse or backpack. Besides, not having it on you defeats the purpose.

In conclusion the reasons you think this is a horrible idea are false.

Perhaps. For sake of argument lets assume none of the guns will ever be defective, and the teachers won't ever waver from their gun safety obligations. What kind of influence do you think it's going to have on a teacher when some student pushes them beyond their level of patience. It's unlikely that they'll draw the gun, but much more likely that they'll think about it if they have the gun on them. And then give them a number of years of thinking about it and watch what happens.

1) It is astronomically unlikely that a defect will make a gun just go off.

2) It is more of a stretch to think that a professional individual who has been properly trained in the carry of a firearm will waver from gun safety.

3) If students pushing teachers would cause them to go over the edge, then why hasn't it happened it? There are hundreds of thousands of teachers who are pushed every day, and have been for years. These teachers also own guns. And yet there have been very few (if any) cases of a teacher going on a spree. So I think your fears are totally unfounded.

Heh, well...
I'm a Texan. That being said, I believe it's all about the second amendment. If they have a liscense, and can be trusted enough to be HIRED for a teacher, why not? It would make phsycos think twice when somone ELSE is armed...
However, probably not the BEST Idea, it should be good for now.

At 9/6/08 05:25 PM, TheMason wrote: 1) It is astronomically unlikely that a defect will make a gun just go off.

While I don't know the stats on defective or damaged guns going off, I'll grant that it is a very unlikely thing to happen. However, just because something is unlikely does not mean it won't happen. To say that it'll never happen ignores that reality. But I agree, it isn't a significant consideration given that any gun anywhere is no more liely to be defective than the ones that would be carried by teachers. It is a danger, albeit a marginal one.

2) It is more of a stretch to think that a professional individual who has been properly trained in the carry of a firearm will waver from gun safety.

I disagree. Training in no way guarantees that a person will act safely. Everyone must pass a driver's test in order to drive in much of the western world. But look at how many car accidents happen. To say that a trained individual will never waver from gun safety is highly naive.

3) If students pushing teachers would cause them to go over the edge, then why hasn't it happened it? There are hundreds of thousands of teachers who are pushed every day, and have been for years. These teachers also own guns. And yet there have been very few (if any) cases of a teacher going on a spree. So I think your fears are totally unfounded.

The "weapons effect" is the finding that the presence of a weapon or even a picture of a weapon can cause people to behave more aggressively. Although once a controversial finding, the weapons effect is now a well-established phenomenon.

The weapons effects is a well documented and well replicated effect.

My fears are based on documented research, what are your doubts based upon?

And you're right, students are more likely to shoots students, but it does happen. Do you really want to make it any more likely that a teacher will shoot a student?