How do armed teachers stop mass shooters?

[_DoubtingThomas]

How do armed teachers stop mass shooters?
https://youtu.be/XhfzH_DxO4Q?t=8s

Is having armed teachers just another stupid idea?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I think the people who're in favor of this policy just don't understand the reality of a firefight. They don't understand the physiological changes that happens when that fight or flight adrenaline hits you. Shooting at a stationary paper target under ideal conditions does not prepare you for that.

They WILL miss.

A firefight is, obviously, a stressful situation. So is combat in general. To train Soldiers to deal with this stress, the moment you arrive at Basic Training, you are under stress. Eating is stressful. Walking is stressful. Cleaning is stressful. Dressing is stressful. The point of all that stress is to acclimate you to stress. To teach you to operate at a level of stress 99% of people will never know. To give you the ability to keep your wits about you during high stress.

Then you arrive at your assigned unit. If you are Combat Arms, the stress training doesn't stop. They train under high stress all the time. They do constant stress-fire drills. They train with simunitions (real guns firing real rounds at a lower velocity and plastic filled with colored chalk).

Training is pretty exhaustive. It's all meant for you to shoot and maneuver in order to kill the enemy. Still, even with this training, you will sometimes get tunnel vision. Your vision clouds out everything but your pinpoint objective. Your hearing goes away. Your heart rate is through the roof.

When the fire fight kicks off, it's startling. Confusion is the default setting. You miss your target. In fact, what is your target? You're not really sure. What's beyond that when you miss? Who are you endangering? Soldiers have the advantage of all looking alike in the way we are dressed and equipped. Just don't shoot at anything that looks like you. Police mostly have the same advantage.

Now, let's take all of that and apply it to your regular civilian.

Not generally adapted to the high stress situations, not trained to deal with the split second decision of close quarter combat, not trained in stress fire situations; generally shoots at stationary paper targets on a range under ideal conditions with no stress. Not prepared for tunnel vision, the active shooter looks just like everybody else, they won't be wearing a uniform, doesn't do drills and exercises to handle an active shooter situation, doesn't think of target, backstop, and beyond because they haven't been told of that.

Now, let's add more adults with more guns to the mix. None of these people know who the "bad guy" is or who the "good guys" are. They see a person with a gun. They have no way to identify them... like a uniform. You are going to have "good guys" shooting each other. You are going to have police shooting them because the police have no “F” ing clue who these people with guns are.

Sure. Let's add more guns to a situation that 99% of the population is in no way trained to handle. In a situation that takes months and years to train Soldiers to handle.

What could possibly go wrong?

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

Sure. Let's add more guns to a situation that 99% of the population is in no way trained to handle. In a situation that takes months and years to train Soldiers to handle.

What could possibly go wrong?

- Doc

It's also worth adding on here that active duty military and vets have astronomical PTSD rates due to traumatic stress.

[_Dr. Shades]

By shooting them.

[_ajax18]

By shooting them.

+100

[_subgenius]

and how come there aren't mass shootings at police stations? at banks? at grocery stores? at NRA conventions? at the lobby before a TSA checkpoint? at the flea market? hospitals?

Is having a citizenry armed really in the best interest of the citizenry? Shouldn't elected and enlisted officials be able conduct business and pleasure without such concerns for being beheaded in the streets because of silly disputes over bread and dignity.
Why don't people believe in Pelosi, she really will provide you with everything you need, she knows precisely what you need....and there is no need to resist that.

[_EAllusion]

One of the more famous mass shootings of recent years was at a military base...

[_Markk]

I think the people who're in favor of this policy just don't understand the reality of a firefight. They don't understand the physiological changes that happens when that fight or flight adrenaline hits you. Shooting at a stationary paper target under ideal conditions does not prepare you for that.

They WILL miss.

A firefight is, obviously, a stressful situation. So is combat in general. To train Soldiers to deal with this stress, the moment you arrive at Basic Training, you are under stress. Eating is stressful. Walking is stressful. Cleaning is stressful. Dressing is stressful. The point of all that stress is to acclimate you to stress. To teach you to operate at a level of stress 99% of people will never know. To give you the ability to keep your wits about you during high stress.

Then you arrive at your assigned unit. If you are Combat Arms, the stress training doesn't stop. They train under high stress all the time. They do constant stress-fire drills. They train with simunitions (real guns firing real rounds at a lower velocity and plastic filled with colored chalk).

Training is pretty exhaustive. It's all meant for you to shoot and maneuver in order to kill the enemy. Still, even with this training, you will sometimes get tunnel vision. Your vision clouds out everything but your pinpoint objective. Your hearing goes away. Your heart rate is through the roof.

When the fire fight kicks off, it's startling. Confusion is the default setting. You miss your target. In fact, what is your target? You're not really sure. What's beyond that when you miss? Who are you endangering? Soldiers have the advantage of all looking alike in the way we are dressed and equipped. Just don't shoot at anything that looks like you. Police mostly have the same advantage.

Now, let's take all of that and apply it to your regular civilian.

Not generally adapted to the high stress situations, not trained to deal with the split second decision of close quarter combat, not trained in stress fire situations; generally shoots at stationary paper targets on a range under ideal conditions with no stress. Not prepared for tunnel vision, the active shooter looks just like everybody else, they won't be wearing a uniform, doesn't do drills and exercises to handle an active shooter situation, doesn't think of target, backstop, and beyond because they haven't been told of that.

Now, let's add more adults with more guns to the mix. None of these people know who the "bad guy" is or who the "good guys" are. They see a person with a gun. They have no way to identify them... like a uniform. You are going to have "good guys" shooting each other. You are going to have police shooting them because the police have no ____ ing clue who these people with guns are.

Sure. Let's add more guns to a situation that 99% of the population is in no way trained to handle. In a situation that takes months and years to train Soldiers to handle.

What could possibly go wrong?

- Doc

I am not for arming teachers. But, from what I read is that those that would be armed...would have to go through police type of training. The problem I see with that is law enforcement academies vary in training.

My son went and taught at one of the best academies in the country...yet from what I have read many academies are not so good. And even the good ones new PC guidelines that weaken the programs. You can't "hurt feelings" to a degree.

I could see a special few teachers doing what is necessary to be ready for a stressful situation, but I am still not sold on the idea.

What if say... a teacher was ex military and took a comprehensive training class specifically for a school environment? Would that be a bad thing? Maybe not, but how many would qualify for that.

[_ajax18]

One of the more famous mass shootings of recent years was at a military base...

Are you talking about the "workplace violence," at Ft. Hood?

[_Doctor Steuss]

For me, it isn’t about what might happen in an active shooter situation, it’s the potential for a gun to accidentally go off. My being against arming teachers in classrooms isn’t because I think teachers can't be competent gun owners. It isn’t because of a belief that teachers are prone to violence. It’s simply because of the potential for accidental shootings.

Just days ago, there was a reserve police officer teaching a course in gun safety, who accidently fired a round in the classroom, injuring some students. Last month, a D.C. officer was accidently shot while serving a warrant. In January an officer in LA shot himself while driving. Late last year, a Tennessee police firearm instructor accidently fired a round during training. While not necessarily in the same boat, around the same time as the Tennessee incident, a Deputy in Georgia accidently fired his gun when he thought he was firing his Taser. A sheriff in Ohio ended up dying from his gun accidently firing. These are trained police officers that not only intensely train for firearm use, but have to employ that training on almost a daily basis.

I could go on, and on with similar incidents, but hopefully that’s enough for my overall point.

Each year, there are more people accidently shot than are intentionally shot in justifiable self-defense. In other words, if you have a CCW, you are statistically more likely to accidently shoot yourself or someone else, than you are to shoot someone in justifiable self-defense.

The chances of my son being a victim of a mass shooting at his school are incredibly small -- almost on par with winning the lottery. Now, that certainly doesn’t mean the problem shouldn’t be addressed; however, adding more guns into the atmosphere actually increases the odds of him being shot rather than decrease the odds. I’d rather not load the dice in a direction that increases the potential for harm in order to prevent a less likely scenario.