TX. Teacher's rights to carry on campus.

[troglodyte]

I wish I could write like that...I guess that's why I teach science instead of english.

Well said.

[bdickens]

My response to the Houston Chronicle's hysterical editorial on Thursday:

Thursday's editorial Teachers Packing Heat is long on emotion and short on facts and logic.

The editorial writer writer regales the reader with the usual litany of unfounded concerns that the anti-gun crowd cooks up every time citizens are allowed to exercise their Second Amendment rights like the free men and women they are. Law-abiding Texans have been carrying concealed handguns and defending themselves with them for over twelve years now and none of those fearful scenarios have played out in all that time. Why would you think they will happen now?

"What if the math teacher misplaces her loaded pistol?" This has not been a problem so far. Neither I, nor anyone I an associate with is aware of any such incident happening. Not many people misplace an item weighing two to four pounds that costs $500- $2000 or more.
"What if the gym coach's gun falls from its holster while he's breaking up a fight?" This isn't a problem for the Police, why should it be a problem for civilians? Guns don't “fall out” of a properly made holster. Besides, what if? What will happen? Nothing. Modern handguns are made with internal safeties that prevent them from firing if dropped.
"What if a disgruntled student wrests a sidearm from the principal?” While I can't say for sure that an armed civilian never has had his gun wrested away and used against him, it is so rare that I can't find a single instance of this occurring. However, according to a study published in the Fall 1995, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, ordinary people successfully defend themselves with firearms between 1 and 2.5 million times per year. Even this very newspaper is chock full of such stories. Why, just yesterday a store clerk here in Houston shot and killed a robber. It is the police who get their guns taken from them, not civilians. This is because police officers end up having to be at contact distance from violent criminals – civilians don't.
“And what if a teacher...responds to a school invader by shooting his own weapon — and more students die?" More importantly, what if a licensed and lawfully armed teacher responds and prevents further mayhem by stopping an attack as soon as it begins? Cowering under a desk didn't work out so well for some 30-odd people at Virginia tech. One armed good guy could have prevented dozens of murders. Does the editorial writer really think that an armed teacher will really take out 30 or more innocent bystanders if he misses the criminal? In fact, Less than 1% of all gun homicides involve innocent bystanders (Sherman, Steele, Laufersweiler, Hoffer and Julian, “Stray bullets and ‘mushrooms’”, 1989, Journal of Quantitative Criminology) and the police have a higher instance of shooting innocent people than civillians do (C. Cramer, and D. Kopel "Shall Issue: The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws”. Independence Institute Issue Paper. October 17, 1994).

The president of National School Safety and Security Services, Kenneth S. Trump is quoted as asking, "What type of 'use of force continuum' has the school district created? ... How does that stand up to such standards held for police officers and others who are armed and deployed in a public safety capacity?" The answer can be found right here in the pages of the Chronicle: "In order for teachers and staff to carry a pistol, they must have a Texas license to carry a concealed handgun; must be authorized to carry by the district; must receive training in crisis management and hostile situations and have to use ammunition that is designed to minimize the risk of ricochet in school halls." (Houston Chronicle, Aug 15, 2008. Emphasis mine.)

I also find it ironic that this very same organization has this statement on it's website: "Teachers, administrators, school support staff,... and other professionals on the front lines of our nation's school are the first responders to any emergency which occurs in their schools.... the reality is that those working inside a school will be the ones immediately responding to and managing an emergency incident while police, fire, EMS, and other community first responders are enroute."
( http://www.schoolsecurity.org/terrorist ... %20Reality )Why should those first responders be denied the most effective tools available to deal with campus violence?

The fearmongering can be seen here: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/edi ... 56346.html

[KC5AV]

That's good stuff. Very well done.

[The Annoyed Man]

Just as I finished reading this thread, I flip over to the news and read this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080821/ap_ ... RJsflvzwcF

Great job Jim

-Cain

That story is a bald-faced lie. It was a gun free zone, and thus the shooting did not happen!

[The Annoyed Man]

bdickens and jimlongley, those were both excellent letters. Good job!

[Sly Dog]

bdickens and jimlongley, those were both excellent letters. Good job!

[bdickens]

Thank you.

[brianko]

As an educator, I would question my ability to react safely in a situation that might involve many hundreds of students occupying a very small space (a situation I encounter on a daily basis). Given the opportunity to legally carry at school, I would decline unless additional training was made available to me (preferably at the district's expense) as to defensive close-quarter use of firearms, alternative defense strategies, and crowd control techniques.

While I do believe the Dallas and Houston press editorials are knee-jerk reactions, I do not believe for a second that any teacher with only state-mandated CHL training under his/her belt is prepared to carry in an educational environment without additional training (and I'm not talking about a one-hour classroom seminar).

[flintknapper]

As an educator, I would question my ability to react safely in a situation that might involve many hundreds of students occupying a very small space (a situation I encounter on a daily basis). Given the opportunity to legally carry at school, I would decline unless additional training was made available to me (preferably at the district's expense) as to defensive close-quarter use of firearms, alternative defense strategies, and crowd control techniques.

You understand....you are NOT required or expected to respond in any way at all with force. Under the conditions you describe...the dynamics of the situation would dictate whether or not the "opportunity" to resist the threat with force would even exist.

One thing is certain though, if you are NOT armed you will never be able to defend yourself or your students. In most cases it is not necessary for you to have "SWAT" like skills in order to change the outcome of things.

I would wager that... while your students are being slaughtered like sheep (cowering under their desks), that they would gladly accept any intervention on your part...even if it put them at some amount of risk.

While I do believe the Dallas and Houston press editorials are knee-jerk reactions, I do not believe for a second that any teacher with only state-mandated CHL training under his/her belt is prepared to carry in an educational environment without additional training (and I'm not talking about a one-hour classroom seminar).

Then by default, you must also proclaim "most" CHL holders to be unfit. . Of course...the decision to defend ones self (or others) must be made with regard to the fact that you are responsible for each bullet launched.

So, additional training is something I support and encourage, but if it came right down to it...I'd rather see an armed teacher with minimal training TRYING to save my child, than one standing up at the chalk board waiting their turn to be cut down.

Not everyone has the stomach for self defense (even if highly trained). Some folks won't really know until the day arrives when they are forced to find out. So, for those who have not firmly committed themselves "mentally" to fight (if necessary), I recommend they not carry a weapon anywhere.

I submit... that if ever Concealed Carry becomes common in our schools, that attacks there will be less frequent and the carnage less severe.

[troglodyte]

As an educator, I would question my ability to react safely in a situation that might involve many hundreds of students occupying a very small space (a situation I encounter on a daily basis). Given the opportunity to legally carry at school, I would decline unless additional training was made available to me (preferably at the district's expense) as to defensive close-quarter use of firearms, alternative defense strategies, and crowd control techniques

I am also a teacher and I yearn for the day to come that I may have the opportunity to be equipped to protect my students with more than a fire extinguisher and a prayer.

While I do believe the Dallas and Houston press editorials are knee-jerk reactions, I do not believe for a second that any teacher with only state-mandated CHL training under his/her belt is prepared to carry in an educational environment without additional training (and I'm not talking about a one-hour classroom seminar).

Then you do not know me and some of my fellow teachers.


Sheepdogs, sheep, and wolves. I choose to be a sheepdog. Everyday, everywhere, in every situation. They are my kids and I will protect them the best I can. Why not allow me the tools to have a fighting chance?

[brianko]

Sheepdogs, sheep, and wolves. I choose to be a sheepdog. Everyday, everywhere, in every situation. They are my kids and I will protect them the best I can. Why not allow me the tools to have a fighting chance?

You need to re-read my post, troglodyte. As always, these types of discussions always degenerate into emotional diatribes. I never advocated denying you the tools you (and other educators) seek.

I, too, share your concerns. What is wrong with the best of both worlds: Armed teachers that are properly trained? I'm sorry, but the Texas-mandated CHL course just doesn't cut it. Of course, you might be an expert in close-quarters combat, in which case you would be very qualified (in my eyes). I would suggest anecdotally that the majority of educators who are also CHL holders are not qualified to that level.

[KBCraig]

What is wrong with the best of both worlds: Armed teachers that are properly trained? I'm sorry, but the Texas-mandated CHL course just doesn't cut it.

A teacher who has never fired anything except the 50 round CHL course, who has a CHL and a 5 shot .38, is in better shape than a Front Site- or Blackwater-trained Grand Master with nothing but a clipboard and a fire extinguisher.

[brianko]

What is wrong with the best of both worlds: Armed teachers that are properly trained? I'm sorry, but the Texas-mandated CHL course just doesn't cut it.

A teacher who has never fired anything except the 50 round CHL course, who has a CHL and a 5 shot .38, is in better shape than a Front Site- or Blackwater-trained Grand Master with nothing but a clipboard and a fire extinguisher.

But a properly-trained teacher who has a grasp of the fundamentals of close-quarter techniques, crowd control, etc. is in better shape than the 50-round CHL holder in your example. I don't understand the resistance to doing this right, rather than just doing it for the sake of doing it.

[srothstein]

Brianko,

The resistance is to the concept you are espousing. I do not think you have realized what you said, but you basically have said that the average adult who has a CHL is not properly qualified to carry a gun to defend himself. That is how I took it, and I would bet that some of the others also took it that way.

You may or may not mean it this way, but if not, you need to explain more on what situation is different about being on a school campus when I defend myself or others. I do not see a school as any different than a mall or a city street. As a police officer, I have had no training that makes a difference to a school from anyplace else. But no one thinks anything about saying a cop should be allowed to carry in the school.

So, my question would be if there is something different about the school or not. Can you explain why you feel this is different and needs different training? If not, then are you saying the training needs to be different for all CHL's? Otherwise, I am not understanding your point and that would be my resistance to it.

[boomerang]

That story is a bald-faced lie. It was a gun free zone, and thus the shooting did not happen!

I don't understand why the Brady Campaign Against Civil Rights doesn't accuse the press of lying when they report shootings in gun free zones.