Next post
The shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was a tragedy. With each new bit of evidence that comes to light about the shooter, it becomes more and more evident it is a tragedy that could have been prevented. The ball was dropped not once but a number of times. Amid the calls for stricter gun control laws came the renewed suggestion that it might just be time to arm our teachers and administrators. Oh, the howls of outrage and misinformation that immediately followed President Trump’s comments on the matter. You would have thought the President and those supporting his suggestion were advocating every teacher coming to school in MARPAT with AR-15s strapped to their backs, guns at their hips and combat knives to their legs.School districts allowing teachers to carry concealed is nothing new. Harrold ISD in Texas has allowed certain teachers to carry concealed for 11 years. Teachers there have a concealed carry permit, go through training and are then allowed to carry on campus. This policy is one supported not only by district administration but by the parents and students. Why? Because it helps the students feel safe in their classrooms. As Harrold ISD superintendent David Thweatt said, “You need to meet a force with an appropriate force, and you need to protect our children.”
Still, you have people like Ryan Waller who claim it is morally wrong for a Christian school, in this case Pantego Christian Academy, to arm teachers and administrators. Rev. Waller’s objection comes after the school voted to arm its administrators. According to Waller, it is “morally reprehensible. And if I say nothing, I am complicit in its madness.”
So now it is madness for a school to do whatever it can to protect our children?
According to Waller, it is the job of law enforcement “and other security professionals” to keep us safe. In typical liberal fashion, to support his claim, he uses the example of an airplane crash. After all, we don’t go around advocating that civilians learn to fly a plane after one crashes, do we? That sort of apples to oranges argument is the sort of thing gun control advocates have used for years. It clouds the issue. Also, in light of what happened in Parkland, we have seen how we can’t always rely on the “professionals” to protect our children.
“There’s no good logic that says teachers and others who work in schools should learn a bit about guns in order to use them in the event of an emergency.”
Learn a bit about guns? Wow, not only does he discredit any training these teachers might undergo to get their CCW, but he also discounts any additional training they might be required to take by their districts. He also discounts the fact that some of those teachers might, themselves, be former military. But then that wouldn’t fit the narrative, would it?
For example, the Callisburg ISD implemented its “Guardian Plan” four years ago. Teachers taking part in it go through the CCW training and permitting required by the state. Then, each year, they go through gun safety and simulated active shooter scenarios with a trained expert. This voluntary program has helped create an atmosphere where the kids going to school there feel safe and parents are reassured their kids will be taken care of in case of an emergency. More than that, no one except the teachers carrying concealed and the administration (and, I assume, the local police) know who is actually armed.
Yet, instead of taking a proactive stance to protect our children, Waller and others would have us “trust the system”. We’re to give it time to adjust and we are to push for stronger gun control laws. And, until that happens, we should sit there like complacent sheep, praying nothing else happens to our kids.
The problem with this approach is it doesn’t solve anything. Worse, it refuses to acknowledge one simple truth. Arming teachers and administrators does have a quelling effect on potential violence in schools. Of the 1032 school districts in Texas, 170 allow teachers and administrators to carry concealed. That is approximately 16% of the districts. Each school campus is posted, warning anyone will ill-intent of the fact their teachers are or may be armed. (Signage varies).
Ask yourself this: what school is a shooter more likely to attack? One where he knows there is little to no chance of immediate response by someone with a gun or one where the very first adult he meets might be armed and ready to shoot him in order to protect the students they’d been charged to teach and protect? I don’t know about you, but I want to give our children the safest environment possible and that won’t happen if we continue to bury our heads in the sand and fool ourselves that gun-free zones are safe places where nothing bad will ever happen.
Wfjag says: Rev. Waller has the analogy (and analysis) backwards.
If I do not trust the safety on commercial aviation, I can study and qualify for a private pilot license, or I can take a bus, or drive myself, or I can not travel. K to 12 education is compulsory (at least until around age 16 in most states). The choice is between public, private/parochial, or home schooling, with mandatory taxes supporting public schools, and the latter options requiring payment of tuition or one parent staying home (foregoing working) to teach and purchasing an approved curriculum (so the latter options involve paying twice, first in taxes and then in other costs).
Rev. Waller increases the costs since lack of a safe environment carries negative costs, too. By allowing trained teachers and staff to volunteer to conceal carry, the safety is increased making public education a more attractive option.
Amanda Green says: Excellent points! Not only would doing so make public education more attractive financially but from a safety standpoint as well. As one of the parents in, iirc, the district with the Guardian program, knowing her child was protected every day by teachers trained to use a firearm, she felt better and so did her child.
Waller also ignores the time required to get cops or security professionals on the scene. Then we have that wonderful example given by the armed resource officer and some of the deputies who responded. If I was a parent in Parkland, I’d be starting a recall petition for the sheriff for allowing my child to remain in harm’s way.
Armst says: As with all things in life, it boils down to this. You, and you alone, are responsible for your and your families well being. No one else has either the necessary will or determination to see this done. I laugh at libs who think government is the answer. Yeah, right, government. Like the one, at all levels, that failed at Parkland. A SOG (system of governments) that put more value on not discipling black, brown, and muzzie (but going after whites) than on making sure that ALL students were safe. Like the government that blew up our healthcare system. Like the government that can’t build jack anymore without decades and billions of wasted dollars. Nope, count me out. I prefer to entrust myself and my family to my own actions and those of my neighbors, not some dipshit govt official who really doesn’t give a damn. Right, Sheriff Israel???
Amanda Green says: You hit the heart of it — we are responsible. Unfortunately, society/government has done its best to tie our hands in too many situations.
djmoore says: I’m going to start leaving this comment wherever I see “teachers and staff are armed” signs highlighted.
That’s weak. That’s lame. That’s a bandaid solution at best.
No, what I want to see are temporary signs celebrating the school’s shooting club win at the state rifle or IDPA championships.
I want a common “first date” to be the girl’s Dad taking the couple out to the range so the Dad can see that the boy is capable of defending his daughter if scoundrels set upon, and the boy can see for himself that the girl can defend her own honor.
I want a popular elective in middle and high schools to be the federally funded militia course–passing students are issued the semiauto version of the current military duty rifle. (See article I, section 8, the paragraph authorizing Congress, “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia…”) History, law, and ethics to be a standard part of the syllabus, along with first aid, map reading, and fire fighting. The actual gun handling and shooting part is a week or two at the end of the year, because everybody knows that stuff already, right?
I want a standard part of a teacher’s CV to include shooting classes taken and taught.
I want shooting competitions at county and state fairs to be a standard politician whistlestop–and for the edification of the candidates, I want speech audiences to include the ribbon winners sitting in the front row, with their weapons proudly displayed. (It’s understood that their job is to scowl fiercely at everything the wannabe proposes.)
I want criminals convicted of having abused their right to arms to commit violent crimes to die by firing squads composed of local militia members. (I don’t expect that to be a common experience.)
And I want popular school mottoes to include “Strong, not safe”, right alongside, “Live free or die”.
I want, in short, a real gun culture, cradle to grave, body and soul–but in the background nevertheless, because I want the real culture to be living full lives in pursuit of liberty and happiness. The gun stuff is just what any well educated citizen knows, like reading.
“Teachers and staff are armed,” my saddle-sore ass. What, are you running some kind of prison camp?
Amanda Green says: I totally agree with you. I will, however, take steps like the Guardian Program as the first step. I will also add to your list putting programs like JROTC back in our schools. Too many removed the programs as protest of the Vietnam War (and I choke on the word war since we weren’t allowed by our politicians and the media to really go in and do what was needed to win it) and never returned them to the schools.
GWB says: the boy can see for himself that the girl can defend her own honor
No shotgun wedding necessary because he won’t be capable of attending, anyway, if he tries to do her wrong. 🙂
What you’re describing (with a few embellishments) is how it used to be. Unfortunately, as a portion of our country urbanizes (or settles), it loses that culture. We do need to bring it back.
We also need to stop treating our children as fragile eggshells to be cushioned against all blows. We need them to grow into men and women and that can’t happen if we never let them out of their glass museum case.
Amanda Green says: I especially agree with your last paragraph. We have done our children a disservice with this trend toward not forcing them to accept the consequences of their actions — or inactions. They aren’t always going to succeed and they will eventually learn they can’t do everything they want to. By denying them the chance to fail as children, they don’t learn the appropriate coping mechanisms. They also turn into the oh-so-easily offended we see now who have to have safe spaces from those who don’t agree with them.
Let schools discipline kids for failing to do their assignments. Get rid of the attitude that they have to be busy every waking moment and just let them be kids. Let them get dirty. Let them have fun. Let them stumble and fall and, when appropriate, fail.
Scott says: Bravo!
DaveP. says: So, when the next teenage Democrat comes through the next school door behind a rifle will Reverend Waller be there to stop him?
No?
Could -WOULD– Waller stop the killer and protect the children in his charge even if he was in the room at the time?
My bet’s no.
Then maybe he should have a nice cup of STFU while better people are talking about this issue.
Amanda Green says: I like the way you think, Joe. I know some of them do, but I’m not sure they are from TX. I saw a couple with crossed rifles and at least one with handguns on it. It did get the point across even more than just the warning.
SDN says: Amanda, what will we do when an armed teacher is assaulted by the next incarnation of St Trayvon of the Blessed Hoodie (also a Broward County denizen, quelle surprise) and has to shoot them? Right now, we will have George Zimmerman 2.0, in which the teacher will be sued, along with the school, and be forced to leave the community to avoid the BLM / Antifa / NAACP lynch mob after him and his family. For all the good it will do; as we saw with Mr. Zimmerman, they will hound him wherever he goes and outright try and provoke confrontations.
BTW, smart teachers will have figured this out in advance and will refuse to take that risk. There is going to have to be both qualified immunity AND some way to police armed teachers so that if there are abuses they are corrected.
GWB says: The culture has to support it. The local culture. They can insulate (if their leaders have courage) against the national/regional bullying in that case. And the same for “dealing with” a problem teacher.
But those are considerations I know these programs acknowledge.
Amanda Green says: Depending on the jurisdiction, there will be some shield laws. Unless the teacher is found to be negligent, of course. It is a concern but so is making sure all the students are protected and teachers I’ve talked with are willing to take that risk because they are more concerned about keeping their students safe.
But, as mentioned below, the culture has to support it. As my post shows, the culture down here does tend to support arming teachers and administrators — within limits — and each year we gain more districts allowing their teachers to conceal carry.
[…] Of course as the Victory Girls blog notes, much to the consternation of the left, the reality of the effectiveness of armed teachers predates both Escape from Hell and President’s Trump’s call an for it […]
[…] Victory Girls BlogArming teachers and administrators does have a quelling effect on potential violence in schools. Of the 1032 school districts in Texas, 170 allow teachers and administrators to carry concealed. That is approximately 16% of the districts. Each school campus is posted, warning anyone will ill-intent of the fact their teachers are or may be armed. (Signage varies).Ask yourself this: what school is a shooter more likely to attack? One where he knows there is little to no chance of immediate response by someone with a gun or one where the very first adult he meets might be armed and ready to shoot him in order to protect the students they’d been charged to teach and protect? I don’t know about you, but I want to give our children the safest environment possible and that won’t happen if we continue to bury our heads in the sand and fool ourselves that gun-free zones are safe places where nothing bad will ever happen.School shootings are rare enough that it's hard to get a decent statistical analysis of what factors encourage or discourage them. But for just a moment, put yourself into the position of a shooter who sees a sign every day on his way into the school building that the staff are armed and will protect their students. Would seeing that sign, every day, make you more or less likely to bring a gun to school and try to murder people? […]
RealDudley says: Arm teachers, bring shooting education and sports back into schools, and merge some police precinct offices into schools along with the requisite access and security measures employed (enjoyed?) at police precinct houses and police HQ now. No one would ever suggest removing armed security officers and metal detectors from courthouses, the US Capitol, etc. Why should schools be different from any other public building? Putting police precinct offices in schools would likely increase community relations with the police while making schools less attractive targets. The educational measures would teach students their rights and responsibilities in a free and civil society, and the students’ proximity to working police might teach them respect for those that risk their lives to maintain it. Private schools should get to make their own decisions.
Amanda Green says: Exactly. As the administrator who came up with the Guardian Project said, Americans made a big mistake when we made schools a gun free zone. We wouldn’t think about making the local bank a gun free zone. And our kids are more valuable and more important than our money. So why aren’t we as worried about protecting them as we are our money?
GWB says: No one would ever suggest removing armed security officers and metal detectors from courthouses, the US Capitol, etc.
I would. The metal detectors, anyway. I have yet to find a good reason to disarm law-abiding citizens in courthouses or a gov’t building.
I also don’t like the idea of schools being co-located with police stations. You bring criminals to police stations, for one thing. For another, I don’t want kids in what amounts to a fortress – that’s the way to end up living in fear.
No, the best way is to let freedom ring and get back to a culture that 1) governs itself with a decent moral code and 2) that takes responsibility not just for one’s mistakes, but for one’s own well-being.
grayswindir says: A minor quibble with your phrasing:
“Because it helps the students feel safe in their classrooms…..”
No, the correct statement should be, “Because it helps the students be safe in their classrooms…”
It’s not about feelings, that’s what a lot of the gun-control laws are marketed as ‘feel safer’. Feelings are irrelevant, in a world where police have no duty to protect the individual and response times (if they choose to show up) are 5-10 minutes, having the effective means to defend oneself and one’s students helps them actually be safe vice just ‘feelin’ it’.
Scott says: Hey, just sec gray, the sheriffs deputies showed up in Parkland… of course they stayed outside, wetting their pants, and ding the bidding of their no account “leader” while kids inside were being killed…. but they did show up! (oh, i forgot, they did stop the firefighters and medics who DID have the balls to go in..)
Mark says: Amanda, please do not call these shootings tragedies. They are heinous acts against the innocent. They are ATROCITIES. Call them what they are.
23 Comments