Atlanticmike wrote: ↑Sun Aug 15, 2021 6:55 pm
Here's were I think we differ the most canpakes. When I say arm some teachers you guys seem to think that's a bad idea for some reason.
Remember, I have no problem with folks licensed or certified to carry for defensive reasons. I’m just opposed to essentially ’deputizing’ some teachers to be
responsible for actively engaging a school shooter on an offensive capacity. I prefer that folks are specifically hired for that task do the latter; they have the freedom of movement to do just that.
We haven’t even considered the emotional or psychological requirements for armed conflict. I’m not keen on adding this to a teacher’s list of tasks when others are already specifically trained to deal with those factors.
To me, saying a teacher couldn't or shouldn't handle the responsibility of protecting his/her students is an insult.
Protecting their students includes shepherding them to safety and remaining with them, as necessary, until the danger has passed. That can’t happen if the teacher leaves students to track down and engage a shooter. My position doesn’t represent an insult. Rather, it’s one of
explicitly trusting those teachers to fulfil their primary responsibility to those kids.
If they’re hunkered down in a classroom and the shooter enters, then that teacher is positioned to defensively protect the students. Otherwise, if the teacher takes off in search of the shooter, but is three classrooms over when that shooter finds the students left behind by the teacher, what do you think will happen?
Again - defensive action, versus offensive action, is the difference here.
Almost as if a trained LEO/ teacher is to ignorant to be able to take down a deranged gunman.
I don’t think that anyone has made that claim. If anything, folks wanting to deputize teachers for LEO activities could be interpreted as believing that LEOs are not capable of protecting the children - hence the need to deputize teachers. I don’t think that
you’re saying that, but you can see where other folks might get that impression.
Many many Americans have more than one job. Some people manage to be trained for two or three completely different jobs and fulfill their duties without a problem, an armed LEO/TEACHER would be no different.
A school shooting situation isn’t the time to be multitasking. The teacher’s primary task is to be protecting the children under their watch at the time - not leaving them behind in order to take potshots at whomever they think is the shooter.
Besides, folks with two jobs - as your example - aren’t usually doing two jobs at the same time. It’s either one, or the other, if you want to be most effective. An active shooter situation is one where you would want to be focused and more effective at your primary responsibility.
Here's a couple more scenarios to help you see where I am coming from, tell me what you think please.
I think that these are handled by what we’ve already discussed.
Now, let me ask you this … let’s say that you’re a sixth-grade teacher, when the alarm sounds and the intercom announces a lockdown due to a shooting threat. What is going to be your primary responsibility, and what will that entail?
c'mon, admit it, you love me!
c'mon, admit it, you love me! 
