POLL: Should Teachers Be Armed with Guns?

[RoyJackson]

Baloney. Have you checked the road rage death rate in Houston recently. They have people taking shots at each other quite frequently with numerous fatalities per year.

I just looked up the statistics through Goggle (type in "Road Rage").
Houston wasn't even in the top ten. Nor have I read anything in the news about a spurt of shootings resulting from road rage...anywhere, for that matter.
The top ten were:
New Brunswick, NJ (520)
Los Angeles (491)
Baton Rouge (475.8)
New Orleans (469.75)
Fayetteville, AR (448)
Burbank, CA (443.05)
Springdale, AR (429.25)
Johnson, AR (423.75)
Tampa (392.75)
Jacksonville (390.75)

This was also interesting"
"Don't let those big insurance companies fool you with their annual road rage ratings. Those surveys may be accurate for the days they gathered the information, but cities change and so does the road rage. The list below uses only the most recent visitor input, and constantly changes. A classic example was Boston's major overhaul in 2006. Road rage was high for them in the summer, and if a survey was taken then they would have been the clear road rage champs for 2006. That wasn't the case though for a years worth a data, and that is why you need my Top Ten, to see what is current. "

Now, per the same website, using statistics for the year 2006, the top 10"
Washington, D.C. (2396.1)
Houston (2062.55)
Miami (2033.25)
Los Angeles (2014.99)
New York (1999.95)
Dallas (1980)
Detroit (1953.325)
Kansas City (1872.55)
Boston (1812.25)
Las Vegas (1754.6)

Houston is on this list, but again, I see no spurt of shooting in Houston (or anywhere else, for that matter) resulting from road rage.

This is the URL:
Do you hate tailgaters? Rate your road rage today!

The statistics appear to be dependent on viewer input.

So, Island Tractor, where'd you come up with your statistics about road rage and shooting?

"My first concern with this "packing teachers" discussion is that there is a rush to institute a "solution" that may well end up causing more deaths not less."
This is the same argument some folks used when there was a concealed carry law initiated in most of the states that have done so. So far, it hasn't proven out.

"My point is simply that even very very low frequency events, things that you can barely imagine, will in fact happen if there are sufficient opportunities. Putting thousands of guns into schools will provide those opportunities. Think statistically not emotionally."
Island Tractor, you've come up with a hypothesis...now find some statistics to prove your point. I suggest you do your homework before posting.

 

[Gatorboy]

Do you hate tailgaters? Rate your road rage today!

Many tailgating problems would be avoided if all drivers would remember:

SLOWER TRAFFIC, KEEP RIGHT.

It's a very simple concept -- if someone is coming up on you and you are in the left lane, YOU are slower traffic and should move to your RIGHT.

 

[JDGREEN4ME]

With great power there must also come great responsibility.
Stan Lee

 

[RedRocker]

Island Tractor, we'll have to agree on grapples but not on the 2nd amendment or guns. I live in Texas and my wife is from Houston, so
I'm not buying your road rage story. Only cowards and idiots shoot at
people over some perceived injustice while driving. Knowing others are
armed tends to put cowards in their place, the idiots get eliminated along
the way.

 

[MossRoad]

Probably, but think about it, whose gonna start trouble when everybody is armed? No road rage, no flipping the bird etc. An armed society is a polite society.

Since when is an armed society a polite society? Where's any evidence to prove that? Florida, where it is very easy for the average citizen to carry a gun was just reported as having the highest incidences of road rage... so that "shoots" that theory right in the patooky.

As I sit in my office every day, as I have for the last 20 years, I look out at the legions of border line mentally ill folks wondering around town all day like the zombies in Night of the Living Dead. And then I drive home through the west side, as I have for the last 22 years, past the cops that are frisking people up against cars, past the drug dealers and prostitutes, past the groups of young adults blocking the side streets trying to intimidate drivers into stopping, and I think, how in the world would arming all these folks make anything better???

 

[Soundguy]

Look at the felony conviction rate for CCW holders.. You will find that it is lower than just about any other quantifiable group... except maybee blind parylized catholic nuns.

CCW holders are among the most law abiding citizens.. the numbers prove it.

Perhaps all these road rage people need to take notice..

Soundguy

Since when is an armed society a polite society? Where's any evidence to prove that? Florida, where it is very easy for the average citizen to carry a gun was just reported as having the highest incidences of road rage... so that "shoots" that theory right in the patooky.

As I sit in my office every day, as I have for the last 20 years, I look out at the legions of border line mentally ill folks wondering around town all day like the zombies in Night of the Living Dead. And then I drive home through the west side, as I have for the last 22 years, past the cops that are frisking people up against cars, past the drug dealers and prostitutes, past the groups of young adults blocking the side streets trying to intimidate drivers into stopping, and I think, how in the world would arming all these folks make anything better???

 

[Bandybear]

"One of those things we'll never know:

How would the frames of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights feel about concealed weapons? I'm not a weapons history buff, but I bet most of those guys were not interested in trying to conceal a flintlock pistol in their pants. I suspect their "right to keep and bear arms" meant mostly plainly visible weaponry. What does that have to do with this interminable discussion? Not a lot, but since their words keep being used to justify the right to carry weapons they could not even have imagined, it is interesting to speculate on."

I believe most people who use this arguement do not realize the genius of the Framers of the Constitution. As we would most likely be in awe of the currently unimagined technology that will be commonplace 200 years from now, they would be in awe of what we have today. However, they probably were knowledgable in history and knew that technology would change. The Bill of Rights were not written to address technology, which is constantly changing, but rather certain truths which are permanent. They knew that an unrestrained government is a tyrannical government, that is why they tried to confine the power of the federal government. They also realized the First Amendment gave the people the power to address their grievances with the government, while the Second Amendment ensured the government could not eliminate the First Amendment.

 

[RoyJackson]

Since when is an armed society a polite society? /QUOTE]

Don't be confused, Mossy...that is from a quote from noted SF author Robert Heinlein (wrote the books "Destination Moon" and "Starship Troopers" were based on).

Here's some more:
Heinlein quotes

 

[Bandybear]

As I sit in my office every day, as I have for the last 20 years, I look out at the legions of border line mentally ill folks wondering around town all day like the zombies in Night of the Living Dead. And then I drive home through the west side, as I have for the last 22 years, past the cops that are frisking people up against cars, past the drug dealers and prostitutes, past the groups of young adults blocking the side streets trying to intimidate drivers into stopping, and I think, how in the world would arming all these folks make anything better???

Moss,

I think most of the posters here would agree that there are certain classes of people who should not be allowed to possess and carry a firearm. Here in PA, many of those you listed above would be excluded. While the Second Amendment does confer the right to bear arms to the people, the Fifth Amendment addresses the taking of libery by process of law. So I do not believe I would be inconsistent in saying I think any rational law-abiding citizen should be allowed to be armed.

 

[Bandybear]

Originally Posted by IslandTractor

My first concern with this "packing teachers" discussion is that there is a rush to institute a "solution" that may well end up causing more deaths not less. Not many of the posts have talked about the potential harm that could be done by bringing weapons into schools. I tried to point out that with millions of children and tens of thousands of teachers there would certainly be situations, difficult to prevent, where kids got a hold of the teachers weapon.

FBI statistics indicate that 10% of Law Enforcement Officers killed in the line of duty are killed by their own weapon. Should we disarm the police?

Where do teachers keep their guns? In their purse? In the drawer?

How about in a holster on their person?? There are enough different types of concealable holsters available this should not cause a problem.

Where does the coach put his gun when he is in the shower?

How about in a locked locker in his locked office?

Here is another example of what could (will) easily go wrong. A distraught father/mother involved in a custody battle barges into the classroom to get their own child. Maybe the teacher doesn't recognize them. Maybe the news the night before included a reminder about Columbine or VTech, maybe the teacher is just frightened...maybe the teacher pulls the gun and shoots. Arm enough teachers and it will happen. Just wait.

Proper training in safe gun handling and legal issues regarding when using deadly force is allowed should minimize such incidents. Will it never happen? NO! Police officers occasionally shoot a subject who later is found to be unarmed (Amidou Diallo was one of the most highly publicized cases). Again, with thesevery very low frequency events,would you advocate disarming the police.

If you do not advocate disarming the police, why not?