WHAT SHOULD I BE DOING INSTEAD OF THIS?
 
January 24th, 2014 By German Lopez | News | Posted In: News, Guns, Gun Violence, Education

School Employees Could Soon Carry Concealed Guns

Research indicates the Republican-backed proposal might fail to improve school safety

4 Comments
     
ohio statehouseOhio Statehouse

The Republican-controlled Ohio House on Wednesday approved a bill that would allow school boards to designate some school employees to carry concealed firearms and prohibit school boards from releasing the names of those employees.

As part of the designation, school employees would have to participate in “active shooter training” established by the state attorney general. School boards and employees could also consult with local law enforcement to establish stronger standards and training.

If a gun-toting teacher injures or kills someone, the rules exempt the school board and employees from liability “unless the injury, death or loss resulted from the employee’s reckless or wanton conduct.”

The bill would also allow off-duty officers to carry firearms in schools.

There are some restrictions: A school board could not force an employee to carry a gun, and gun-carrying rights could not be part of a collective bargaining agreement.

While a Republican majority supports the rules to increase safety in schools, some research indicates the plan could backfire.

A review from the Harvard Injury Control Research Center found states and countries with more guns tend to have more homicides.

Specifically, men and women in places with more firearms are exposed to a larger risk of gun-related homicide.

University of Pennsylvania researchers found similar results in a 2009 study.

“On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault,” the study concluded. “Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.”

A 2009 ABC News special found even trained gun-wielders fail to properly react in the event of a shooting. In multiple simulations that placed trained and armed students in a classroom, none of the participants succeeded in stopping an unexpected shooter from landing fake rounds that would have been deadly in a real shooting.

Local state representatives split along party lines on the bill. Democrats Denise Driehaus, Connie Pillich and Alicia Reece voted against it, while Republicans Peter Stautberg and Louis Blessing voted for it.

The bill now needs to move through the Republican-controlled Ohio Senate and Republican Gov. John Kasich to become law.

 
 
01.26.2014 at 02:18 Reply

If a gun-toting teacher injures or kills someone?  Has this happened in ANY school un the US where the teachers were armed? Cite any instances instead of fearmongering.

" some research indicate.." Flawed Research.  

You need to read John Lott's Book "More Guns Less Crime". He has shown that as a law abiding community starts to arm itself, the crime SUDDENLY decreases.

Want to see real, actual results in arming Teachers?  In Israel. When their schools were under attack from terrorists almost daily they started arming teachers.  Guess What, the terrorist quit showing up.  Armed teachers were the best response to the situation.

Several states already arm teachers. I have yet to hear of any schools having gun massacres whre the teachers were armed.  Have you?


 

01.26.2014 at 10:09 Reply

"Research"?

 

Sheeeyeah. Right. Research.

 

Try researching this: In every state where "shall issue" concealed carry laws have been enacted, violent crime rates have gone DOWN. Add to this the fact that Utah (an example; not the only one) has allowed concealed carry on its college campuses for years, with no negative results.

 

Apart from all that, simple logic tells you that only immediately meeting force with equal or superior force has a prayer of stopping an attack.

 

This "research" undoubtedly started with an assumed result, and tailored its "evidence" to confirm that result.

 

It happens too often to not be likely in this case.

 

If you really want to address this issue effectively, report facts instead of projections, and suggest concrete remedies instead of incessantly delaying the obvious.

 

01.26.2014 at 05:49

Violent crime has been going down for decades across the country for numerous reasons, including socioeconomic changes that are beyond the framework of gun laws.

Besides, there are plenty of correlations showing the opposite of what you claim. For example, violent crime began dropping after the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which enacted federal background checks, passed. If I only looked at that correlation, I could mistakenly reach the conclusion that gun control can be credited for the entire violent crime drop.

The problem with these vague correlations is they don't control for multiple external factors. The studies I cited in the article try to control for those factors, and the results are pretty clear.

 

01.26.2014 at 03:06 Reply
J D

This article is loaded with misleading half-truths.  I saw the 2009 ABC News special they reference.  The "armed responders" were set-up to fail.  They were forced to wear clingy cover clothing, were always seated in the same place in the scenario, so the "perp" knew exactly where they were, and the subjects WERE NOT "trained gun wielders" as the article claims.  Most of all, they were all issued guns with non-lethal training squibs, much like used in movie productions.  It was make-believe from start-to-finish.  

I worked in armed protective services for a number of years, (besides discussing this subject at-length with SWAT officers and firearms instructors), so I actually DO have a professional opinion.  Whenever I worked a situation where an Active Shooter situation was anticipated, you dressed so your gun was easily accessible (plainclothes whenever possible, since a uniform makes you a priority target), you varied your location, and you made yourself the hunter, not the hunted.   

What is being proposed here makes so much sense; it allows schools to affirmatively prepare for an Active Shooter attack.  Staff who are already intimately familiar with the building and other staff will be able to respond far more quickly than conventional law enforcement responses.  They will blend-in to the building, so potential attackers won't know who might shoot-back during an assault (note my previous comments about uniforms being targets in an attack).  This actually is similar to what the Israelis have been doing for many years, and it's been proven to work.  I wish that other states could get past the politically-correct myth that banning guns makes you safer.  It makes it safer for predators and terrorists, not their intended victims.  

The definition of insanity is doing what hasn't worked in the past, and expecting a different result.  Gun-bans and disarming potential victims hasn't worked for 40 years.  It's time to do what works; this model has worked other places, it should work here.  

 

 

 

 
 
Close
Close
Close