TexasCHLforum.com

This IS good news. Hope it becomes contagious and spreads. Pass the article around!

flintknapper wrote:

Trump said he would have advised against allowing teachers to arm themselves, if only because of liability concerns. In the long run, it could have been cheaper and safer to hire security or off-duty police, he said.

I guess I'm at a loss to understand this statement. Maybe I'm just "thick", but since the teachers are already on the payroll (and assuming they are not being compensated to carry) how could it be "cheaper" to hire security personnel or off-duty police?

Somebody help me here.

Is he assuming there will be a litigation down the road if teachers carry, but not if security does?

Cost of litigation vs. cost of hiring a full time cop with a gun.

It's been a while since I've posted here, but this new was too good not to post. This was some of the best news I've seen in a looong time. What a way to start my day. We can only hope that this common sense will spread to other schools. Now we need to get this into the larger city schools where it's really needed, but I won't hold my breath.

BTW anyone read the reader comments about the story in the Houston Chronicle.

Iggy Pop wrote:

flintknapper wrote:

Trump said he would have advised against allowing teachers to arm themselves, if only because of liability concerns. In the long run, it could have been cheaper and safer to hire security or off-duty police, he said.

I guess I'm at a loss to understand this statement. Maybe I'm just "thick", but since the teachers are already on the payroll (and assuming they are not being compensated to carry) how could it be "cheaper" to hire security personnel or off-duty police?

Somebody help me here.

Is he assuming there will be a litigation down the road if teachers carry, but not if security does?

Cost of litigation vs. cost of hiring a full time cop with a gun + the same litigation.

Fixed it for ya.

+1 For the good guys!

Is this all legall???

lunchbox wrote:Is this all legall???

Yes, with written authorization from the school.

Chas.

will this be used as an example in the 2009 session to argue schools be taken off the no carry list???

As an employee of a community college, I am pleased to see this. Of course, I do not see this happening in my workplace (located in the bastion of no-common sense, Austin). But I am still encouraged by this action. I am also glad to see the conditions about extra training. In reality, this should minimize any liability concerns.

Any school district could do the same thing by quietly modifying their no-weapons policy to state "except for those authorized by state or federal law to carry concealed handguns."

True, but you know what a political hot potato that would be.

With the givin number of students that would be in the middle of a possible situation and the amount of chaos that would be in the area, I too agree with the extra training. I am not just talking about a weekend class. It should be on going like, join IDPA of USPSA.
I have been shooting IDPA for a year now. The main thing I think ppl learn, other than safety, is confidence in using their weapon. I love to watch how the new shooters progress in the first couple of months alone. I think that the biggest part of this progress is they are more confident in the handling and use of the weapon. After the shooter has become more confident in how to use and handle it, then you see the times getting faster.

I think this very valuable to anyone that plans to carry. And even more valuable to someone that plans to carry where so many lives in their care every day.

(topic shift...on)
I also strongly believe that LEO should be required to undergo more of this type of training. This is not a slam on LEO but face the facts......Many LEO just are NOT gun ppl and refuse to shoot their sidearm anymore than what is required to qualify. As sad as it is, I know a few of them that are that way.
(topic shift...off)

my to the ones in this town that had the guts to stand up for what they believe in and what is our right.....and my to the Great State of

This is getting forwarded to my school board!

Any special training requirements are absurd for several reasons.

Explain the diffference to me where packing a conceled handgun and using it in a school is different than doing so at the mall, a sit down restaurant, church, a concert, Starbucks, sitting in traffic, etc.

If we require special training for schools, the antis are going to "special training required" us into oblivion.

Since a lot of CHLers already can outshoot LOTS of LEOs, are the districts going to demand that the LEOs get their act together? I seem to recall that historically LEOs hits to shots fired ratio is nothing to brag about.

Anygunanywhere