Today's Poll: Do you think security at schools should be increased?
I'm interested in those who voted yes, what measures would you want to see as well?
Currently the district has a card access system that only staff can use. Doors are locked if not and the main office of each building must buzz them in.
What other steps would you like to see? Thank you!
Well Phil as we all know, even though a glass door is locked, it can be shatter by a gun blast, metal pipe, rock, etc... Maybe, they can make the main entrances into the school, blast and Bullet resistant or a solid metal door with a 9x9 inch or slit style window, position far enough from the door lock mechanism or to allow an emergency response. Make the exterior windows shatter resistant and risen off the ground high enough to make them harder to access through. LeRoy High School has a Police Officer stationed within the school. You can’t make every school into a fort but, simple steps could allow you to make it difficult to access.
I said yes as according to news reports the shooter in Connecticut was able to get into the school thru a window. I think there should be an alarm system or locks of some sort not just on the doors but on windows also. Maybe it would help a lot of people feel safer in Batavia if we knew what the school has done to keep things safe. I for one do not know what the school does to keep students from bringing weapons in to school.
The shooter could not have come through the wire-reinforced window that was broken, so that's dis-information. Latest "word" is that the principal let him in (?!?)...
You all want this solved? Put a loaded handgun in the pocket of every staff/faculty member at schools... Yeah, you might get one or two injuries/fatalities, but one will be the person who intended to kill many people...
Or, we can go along with the agenda, and take all the guns away, and then NOBODY will be safe! Can you imagine the field-day the 'haves' would start? It'd look like Stalin had taken over the USA... tens of millions of Americans dead...
(Oh... I didn't vote, as it really is irrelevant... If 'the powers that be' REALLY want to solve the problem, the ONLY solution is a gun in every pocket(book)... But, as the end of this type of problem would also be the end of taking down the 2nd Amendment, this CANNOT and Will Not happen!)
A friend of mine brought up a point yesterday: "Nobody places a sign on the outside of their house stating that it's a gun-free zone." Schools are easy targets for people with ill-intent on their mind. What stops a bad person with a gun? A good person with a gun. The minute we prevent people from having the option to protect their selves, we make them nothing but victims.
"What stops a bad person with a gun? A good person with a gun"
Well said Doug...quote of the day.
So, Josh, just to understand what I'm hearing. You would like us to place guns into the hands of our staff? Not a security detail, but you want my kid's kindergarten teacher to be packing heat?
"Yeah, you might get one or two injuries/fatalities, but one will be the person who intended to kill many people..." Hold on, what if one of those fatalities is an accidental discharge?
I still prefer my solution which is similar to John's every desk would have a handgun safe and teachers would have the only key. Would keep accidental discharges out of the equation but have an "equalizer" tool available should the unthinkable occur. Then you let everyone know that this school's teachers are armed. No more people thinking these students are easy targets. But everyone is still safe and the teachers get a field trip of their own every quarter to a gun range to keep skills up and maybe even work something into Phys Ed to teach kids the hows and whys of RESPONSIBLE gun ownership.
You can't mandate that a teacher or administrator be armed. But you should not forbid it either.
Check how secure the door locks really are and is the window/door glass shatterproof.
Here's a fact: We entrust the welfare of our children for a large part of their life with school teachers. I want at least some of those teachers to actually be able to protect them. We expect it of our police so why not a few teachers, too?
"The gunman is believed to have entered the Sandy Hook Elementary School yesterday by shooting out a window in the front and breaching security, Connecticut State Police said today.
Lt. George Sinko told reporters, "[It appears that] he shot out the glass and entered the school"."
This is from one of the articles I read about the shooter going through a window. It is on more than one website and by different news sources. That is why I questioned the window issue.
Guns aren't bad..SOME PEOPLE are bad. Lets allow good people with guns to protect our children from bad people with guns. The kids don't need to know which teacher is packing, but that's the point of an armed, responsible society. Teachers go through a hell of a lot of training and education to become teachers in the first place. I do not hold every teacher accountable for a few bad apples in the bunch. At some point, we need to recognize that most people have the ability and desire to be upstanding and trustworthy. If we choose not to believe that, why then would anyone send their child to public school?
Well Doug, I'll be honest. I wouldn't allow my kids to go to a school where the teachers had weapons in the classroom, if I'm being honest. I have no objections to armed security, but I don't pay for my teachers to have that by my kids. It does not really matter to me if they are good people or not. The word accident is pretty clear.
I agree that windows should be looked at to make sure they can't be accessed.
I do however, Doug agree with you that the weapon is not the issue. A weapon is a tool of its user's desire. If that user wishes to commit harm, the reality is they will commit it not matter what tool is in his grasp.
This is, and will remain a mental health issue for me.
I'd rather the terminator watched over my children than Mrs Doubtfire. "Run and hide, Children. I'll hold off the bad mad with grape cool aid and pie crust!" Or the terminator: "Come with me if you want to live."
I have no illusions about the world I live in. Some people are bad, period. We can't meet them with flowers and a picnic basket. At some point we have to meet them with equality.
Our society doesn't want to address mental health issues. They'd rather toss people into jail. Until the time arrives that I don't have to worry about a psycho trying to kill me, I'm staying armed.
You could cut the security guard there now and hire retired police/peace officers. They are already highly trained and you could hire them on a per diem basis. Since they are retired and hired on a per diem basis, you do not have to pay benefits. You could have one per day and have him/her at a different school each day on a random basis. Save money and better security.
Phil...be reasonable how often do you hear of a police officers gun misfiring or accidentally discharging. Then compare that to how many officers there are out there with live firearms. I mean that is like saying you wont let your children go to school during a thunderstorm because they might accidentally get hit by lightning. Again no one considers the added safety by having a locked gunbox in a drawer or built onto the wall of the classroom. Then the gun isnt carried, wont accidentally discharge but is available if needed.
Is the president more important to you than your children? He has the secret service on HIS side! Who does your child have? A teacher with an eraser and an iPad?
Kyle, police officers are sent through extensive training. You are not required to have that training to purchase a firearm in this state, so your comparison, while affable, doesn't hold or sway my opinion. I see no benefit in placing lockbox firearms in classes with civilian educators , when you could get skilled, heavily trained personnel instead.
The idea of arming teachers seems as much of an over reaction, to me, as banning assault rifles.
These school shootings are horrific, tragic, sad and should be unthinkable, but they are also -- in relative terms to all the schools and all the guns in this country -- rare.
We should not, I do not believe, legislate or change policy based on emotional reactions to tragic events.
Mark, I've never been through civilian fire arms training, but I have been through law enforcement training -- both provided by the military and courses I took on my own. The procedures, protocols, decision-based policies, etc., are pretty extensive for law enforcement. It's among a cop's primary job to be able to handle a firearm professionally in any and all situations and within the bounds of the law and departmental policies. I have a hard time believing the same training applies to civilians for a carry permit (correct me if I'm wrong). Anybody who carries a weapon as part of a job, I would expect, would have training more like law enforcement than just general safety.
I am not disputing that at all, I went through extensive fire arms training as a Military Policeman, the reference was more toward missfires and accidental discharges, I never meant to imply law enforcement training and civilian training are anyway on par. There are safety courses required that was all I was implying
I am against arming teachers for a totally different reason. simply, that is not their job nor should it be.
Statements like we should be arming teachers is unequivably reactionary. There is absolutely no way to prevent shootings like this from ever happening. Not by gun control, armed guards or AT 4's mounted on school busses, to think otherwise is simply nieve.
We have been locking down schools here since Columbine, teachers and administrators do have protocals in place for such events, infact at Sandy Hook had not those protocols been implimented by some of the teachers the death toll may have been far worse.
Until the mental health and social desensification is addressed, there isn't a protocal or gun law that will prevent this from happening again. In my opinion the disgussion is heading far down the wrong path.
I said it before, a loonatic who feels the need to wreak havoc, will find a way to circumvent any protocal, especially if his ultimate intent is his own suicide. Until we find a way to identify, treat and/or confine those with psycopathetic tendencies, nothing will prevent something like this.
EDIT: I didn't read your previous comment until after I posted this Howard, but obviously we agree on the overreaction part
Thanks for the clarification, Mark!
But I guess I'm with Howard. I would expect anyone who uses weapon as part of a job assignment to be exceptionally proficient with its use.
I don't think we need a solution that will cause school districts million of dollars they don't have...Look at what we have done in this county because of 9/11 ...TSA , Homeland security,Patriot act,two wars...Billions of dollars spent because a few Arabs were able to crash a some planes into buildings..When in reality if pilots were allowed to carry guns in the plane or just have reinforced doors going to the cockpit..all this might have been avoided... I don't think anything at this time should be done...What are we doing about the shooting in the movie theater...Nothing..You have find out a way to get help to the mentally ill before they do what they do...If a teacher of their own free will wants to carry a gun in school they should be able too..
The idea of mandating teachers be armed is stupid. But if a teacher wants to be armed, then why not?
Again, if you want armed security, don't reinvent the wheel. Hire retired police/peace officers.
I agree banning so called “assault weapons” is reactionary.
I despise those in Congress who have used this tragedy from the millisecond it was reported for their selfish political gain well before these little angels in Sandy Hook were laid to rest.
We should allow our Teachers who choose to be armed enhanced pay for their diligence with yearly paid continuing training at an accredited shooting school such as Thunder Ranch (http://www.curtrich.com/tr.html)
If saving just one child’s life as a result, then call me a reactionary because I want our Nation’s children to have a fighting chance and not be held forever hostage by Political Expediency.
I'm not really comfortable with the idea of gun-carrying teachers, but certainly not unless they've had extensive training in the kind of situations they might face -- defensive tactics, safety of the children first, shoot-don't-shoot training, negotiations, recognizing the nature of threats (like, what if the guy is booby-trapped so if shot he blows up? or how to deal with a heavily armored individual? or multiple assailants?)
And then about cost and who pays, and insurance, and background checks ... there's a whole can of worms here that our system is not set up to handle smoothly.
And the idea of armed teachers ... really?
I agree with Howard, I do not feel comfortable in allowing teachers to carry guns in school. As we have seen some teachers can't be trusted. Not to mention what would be the policies and procedures for a teacher to be armed. You would need to have them attend a safety class and they would be required to remain proficient with such weapon. What would be the rules of engagement? You just can't have a teacher go around shooting away with hundreds of other students around. Why can't we allow 1-2 to arm Police Officers to roam the school?
Some training, such as Thunder Ranch is better than none given the present situation in our schools nationwide. How has that worked out for us so far?
Armed teachers...really Please don’t sell the average teacher short. One doesn’t have to be a Navy Seal to stop situations like Sandy Creek.
The average Patrol Officer does not have extensive training for situations such as hostage negotiations, booby-trapped assailants, let alone heavily armed multiple assailants who might be body trapped.
The Veteran Officer will observe while calling for backup and wait for the appropriate response teams to take over unless things escalate.
Why wouldn’t the mentioned trained teacher use the same common sense to do the same? With the proper communications, this said teacher, could then be in constant contact with the police; somethings as simple as a dedicated police radio. In the Sandy Creek situation, one well placed bullet would have saved innocent lives.
Let’s open up this can of worms, address all concerns and find the money; perhaps we should suspend all foreign aid and use that money until our children are safe.
Richard, just to update you. For Active Shooter situations our officers are being trained not to wait for backup. The problem with waiting is that, it allows the active shooter(s) time to barricade and/or shoot more victims. I have been through numerous active shooter training classes and they teach us to react to the threat immediately. Even if we are out gun we are taught to engage and bog down the threat while other agencies respond. If we are able to secure a section to allow other responding law enforcement safe access towards the threat. Fort Hood being a perfect example, the two initial responding officers were able to engage immediately and saved countless lifes. So, your backup theory is no longer the case.
Bring all our troops home now.Close all bases.Protect Americans first.Put them in schools.And keep our noses out of the whole worlds business. .
Emery that is no answer. I agree with you that, we should stay out of others affairs that do not effect us but, after 9-11. I rather fight the enemy overseas than allow them the ability to bring the fight to the U.S.
It is unconstitutional to use Miltary Troops for law enforcement unless a state of martial law is declared.
Seriosly, do you want to be Russia or Iran Emery?
The absolute last thing we want is federal troops enforcing civil law
EDIT: Correction it is constitutional, Posse Communtatus is a federal law (Posse Commutatus Act 1878) Miltary members can enforce civilian law but ONLY at the direction of a Higher Authority and within the boaunds of constitutionality as perscribed by congress.
That said, it is still a repugnant thought
Very true but, you never know what Obama has in mind.
A little random, but related searching .. came across this wikipedia page that lists all violent deaths at schools going back to the 1700s.
I've seen some media reports that Sandy Hook is the biggest massacre, besides Virginia Tech, but actually many, more elementary school children (45) were killed in 1927 in Bath, Mich., by a bomber (who was mad because he lost an election).
My main impression of the Posse Commutatus Act is learning about it in USAF law enforcement tech school, and then how seriously my supervisors and commanders throughout my four years were about it. It made a very strong impression on me that my superiors in the military were not the least interested in enforcing civilian laws.
Howard my superiors warned in a big way about getting involved with civilian law enforcement, a higher authority means President or Congress not some Provost Marshal, that was what my Major used to drill through our heads.
Phil, Are you still a member of the school board? If so, what does the board think about this and are they thinking about making any changes to security in the system that isn't already in place? What do your current administrators think? Any of them calling for more security?
I am getting in to this discussion late, however.......
1)No more gun controls, except for the mentally challenged
2)Better help for the mentally challenged beside dosing them away
3)Get our kids away from OR out from in front of video games and movies, that are proving to lead to desensitization of our youth
4)Better education for home gun saftey. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, BUY A DAMN GUN SAFE!
5)Having an armed guard to protect the most treasured members of our community is a great idea. a couple of part timers, proficient with weapons and tactics would certainly be helpful.(retired military, police or corrections officer?)
The Rasmussen Reports daily numbers on this subject today.
1)27% prefer more gun controls(hhhmmm wonder what side of the political spectrum they are on)
2)15% want emphasis on limits of violent movies and video games
IN A SEPERATE POLL
1)an over whelming amount want better health care for the mentally ill in lew of gun control (86%) WOW!?!
the poll was conducted over three days of 1000 adult likely voters split 30/30/30 R/D/I, +/-3% AND a 95% confidence.
I'm a teacher. I've been a teacher for almost 30 years now. I have been following these posts, and other posts, hoping and praying that the world would come to its senses. So far, I do not see that happening, so I'm going to add my own opinion to this mix. Trust me, nobody is more horrified by the events in CT than I am. I cannot imagine the terror and pain experienced by each of those children, their families, the community, AND the teachers and staff in the school. That being said, I'd like to explain why it is a really bad idea for teachers to carry handguns, something that I would have thought would not ever require explanation.
1. Teachers are not trained in the use of firearms during the certification process. I'm wondering how we could fit this in. Perhaps, in between psychology class and special education class, we could send prospective teachers to the gun range for a quick course? And should we require that the certification be continually renewed? Teachers are currently required to take regular coursework, in the area of their certifications, in order to maintain certification. Should we add marksmanship to that process? If a teacher is not able to shoot a gun with whatever accuracy you determine to be appropriate, does that teacher then have to forfeit her teaching certification? This was not a job requirement when I signed my contract. It seems unreasonable for you to make that a requirement now.
2. If you insist that I must be in possession of a firearm, as part of my teaching responsibilities, how will you ensure that I am able to maintain control of that gun? You may not have noticed, but teaching is becoming a dangerous career. Teachers are often faced with students who demonstrate challenging or aggressive behavior. How can we be certain that, when an emotionally disturbed adolescent attempts to take my firearm, I will not be overpowered, and that firearm will not be used against the children that you supposed it would protect? This is not a farfetched scenario. I can tell you that teachers are frequently confronted by aggressive students. Add a firearm to that situation, and you have created certain disaster. Or would you prefer that I simply shoot the aggressive student? And would you feel the same if you were the parent of that aggressive student...or the parent of any other child in that classroom?
3. I don't like guns. I don't have any guns in my home. This is a personal choice that I have made. I will not question your right to carry a gun, but I take issue with your insistence that it is somehow appropriate for me to carry a gun while I am working. I am, however, well aware of the risks of gun ownership, which is why I have made the choice that guns are not an option for me or my family. If I was comfortable with firearms, I might have chosen a different profession, but I did not. I chose teaching. I never would have dreamed that there might come a time when I would have to defend my right to not carry a gun as part of that career choice.
A teacher's job is so much more than just teaching students. Teachers are sometimes social workers, psychologists, mandated reporters, surrogate parents, and custodians. Please do not ask us to be armed bodyguards, as well. For most of us, this is contrary to the reasons we became teachers. Yes, we need to make some changes in order to protect our children AND the staff in our schools, but arming teachers is not the answer. Please do not address irrationality with more irrationality. Let's work together to ensure that all of our schools are safe zones for our children.
Excellant post. However, dispite your personal opinion....which you are entirely entitled to, you most accept the realities of this new World where violence can be a daily occurance.
I read an article the other day about how they handle this situation in Texas. Lets face it, the state of Texas doen not mess around in most areas of criminal law and other things pretailning to public and personal safety. They assign a responsible to be an " Guardian " His position is only known to the school board and himself. He or she is specially train in tactical combat shooting and packs a pistol to defend his school against any and all threats. I think this is a logical solution to the type of situation that occurred last Friday in Sandy Hook. The Principal and Psychologist who were gunned down, may have stood a chance if properly armed and trained for these types of situations.
Yes, I am. There is definitely a discussion being had around many things right now. I can tell you, no one is supporting putting weapons in the classrooms with teachers, but there are discussions around further building security, and things such as voting locations going forward.
Details will be shared with everyone as they come.
Phil, Thank you.
Eileen, I agree completely. I would never want or require for that matter, any one to carry a gun that doesn't want to. May God bless you every day, for the work that you do.
Phil was that you that gave me the thumbs down on the Hochulfraud thing? lol
I didn't even see what you wrote, Mike.
Just a thought, would it be better to have a few armed teachers with limited training, or do we just hope that nobody ever attacks a soft, defenseless target like a school ever again? I hear a lot of talk about placing one "retired" police officer into every school. It seems a bit absurd (to me) to add all of that expense when many teachers probably already have permits and a sidearm. One officer in a huge building is hardly a deterrent. If a shooter has no idea how many teachers are armed, they just might think twice about attacking in the first place. I don't think it takes a great deal of training to figure out who a shooter is and what to do about it. The safety of the children is the first priority but I doubt there's a lot of time to get the kids to safety once an assault starts. I'd rather a teacher had the ability to start firing some lead at the shooter and making that shooter think twice about going in that direction or even incapacitating the bad guy with a well placed shot. The shooter is already going to be firing rounds so STOPPING them ASAP only makes sense. Everyone seems to think that more guns means more shooting, but I just don't see it that way. I also do not worry about accidental discharges or a kid getting a hold of the teacher's sidearm. I also do not worry about teachers getting mad at each other and start shooting each other. Those scenarios are things of Hollywood hysteria. People just might be surprised at how many citizens actually do carry when out in public. I think it can be done and IS done safely all the time. Areas of the country with the highest murder and crime rates are the areas with the most restrictive gun laws. Law abiding citizens obey the law, but criminals don't. I wish we lived in a land of sanity and level headed thinkers. People want to think with their emotions instead of their brains and good people lose because of it. It just stand to reason that being armed when a gunman is trying to kill you is better than holding up an iPhone with the recording of a barking dog on it. Come on, people, use your head!
At some point, good people have to be trusted with guns.