PBS documentary on arming teachers in America showing on 3-22-18 thursday at 9pm est

1221 Views 16 Replies 13 Participants Last post by ICUKev, Mar 28, 2018

pegasus

Discussion Starter · Mar 23, 2018

Sorry for the late notice, I just now noticed this myself. As I was looking thru the guide, my local PBS affiliate has a half hour show on at 9pm e.s.t. tonight (thursday 3-22-18), called G is for guns: the arming of teachers in America. I expect it to be a one sided anti gun hit piece, but I would be glad to be wrong about that. I'm going to record it and probably will only be able to stomach it in small doses to get thru the whole show if it's as inaccurate and inflammitory as I think it will be. It's not so much because I expect it to be anti gun, it's that most anti gun stuff I see by the 3 letter networks is either:

A: they narrowly use selected facts to bolster their argument, which is very misleading, or

B: what they say is not factual at all. I'm not talking about little things, like calling a magazine a clip, but bizarre things, from people who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

C: they things they think are facts because they base their belief solely on themselves, like the teacher I heard say if you arm teachers they will accidentally shoot more students than the mass shooter, because that's what she feels would happen if she had to shoot an attacker, regardless of training, and therefore every staff member is just the same as she is. Unless the staff member has a uniform and a badge though, because that badge is some kind of magic talisman that will guide the bullet to the target. :sarcasm:

Reactions: 5

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

230JHP

· #2 · Mar 23, 2018

For the person in your example C, I'd like to someone to ask the question -- Would arming teachers be worthwhile if it would save one child's life?

Of course, in your example B, don't forget -- they will need to include testimonies from expert children, tearful bystanders, to name a few.

News yesterday had a segment on a Washington trip by "Stoneman Douglas shooting survivors".

Now every child who was at Stoneman Douglas, even if they were on the far side of the campus and had no clue what was going on until later, is a "Stoneman Douglas shooting survivor".

Reactions: 4

gbusmech

· #3 · Mar 23, 2018

No School Shootings In Israel....

See less See more

Reactions: 5

dwhite

· #4 · Mar 23, 2018

Some of them just cant get it. It's like the only solution acceptable to a lot of them is just
rounding up ALL the guns. They can't grasp there are estimated three hundred million plus
guns in the U.S. How long would it take to round them all up?

Still, the bad guys are not going to surrender what they have.

These people also don't realize how easy it is to make a gun.

These guys make them with hand tools.

All the Best,
D. White

See less See more

Reactions: 3

53rdcard

· #5 · Mar 23, 2018

Its like they don't get that this is to be a voluntary thing, the government doesn't want to hand out guns to all the teachers, and they have to have additional training to carry in a school.

They are also not to be the first line of defense in a shooting, they are to defend the students, and unlike the hero teachers of the past who had only the option of throwing themselves in front of the bullet to save the kids, and died, the armed teacher has a chance of actually saving not just the kids, but themselves as well, if our teachers are willing to die for the kids the teach, you would think they would be willing to live for them.

If nothing else, once the teacher is dead the shooter can then kill the people he or she died to protect. where the armed teacher can stop the bad guy.

We just had a shooting where it was clear that a armed response in the school can save lives, 2 people were injured, the shooter was killed by the armed officer at the school, a very bad situation didn't become worse.

How can it possibly be even a bit unclear that arming those in danger of being shot, is better then just saying, well, you can always die protecting someone else while you wait for the police to show up.

See less See more

Reactions: 3

dwhite

· #6 · Mar 23, 2018

53rdcard said:
Its like they don't get that this is to be a voluntary thing, the government doesn't want to hand out guns to all the teachers, and they have to have additional training to carry in a school.

This was exactly where one of the local broadcast stations went, "It would cost over four-million dollars to arm all the counties teachers".

You don't arm them all. Ten in a school of a thousand would be plenty of deterrent. That's all you need
adequate deterrent. Determined deterrent is even better. Arming every teacher would be like just handing
out drivers licenses.

All the Best,
D. White

Reactions: 1

Smokewagon

· #7 · Mar 23, 2018

53rdcard said:
Its like they don't get that this is to be a voluntary thing, the government doesn't want to hand out guns to all the teachers, and they have to have additional training to carry in a school.

Oh, they get it alright. They just don't want their viewers to get it.:sad:

Reactions: 5

pegasus

Discussion Starter · #8 · Mar 23, 2018

dwhite said:
This was exactly where one of the local broadcast stations went, "It would cost over four-million dollars to arm all the counties teachers".

You don't arm them all. Ten in a school of a thousand would be plenty of deterrent. That's all you need
adequate deterrent. Determined deterrent is even better. Arming every teacher would be like just handing
out drivers licenses.

All the Best,
D. White

Regarding the bolded, that's still cheaper than having two full time SRO's at every school. I saw two because if you put all your hopes on one person, that person either

A: might be the first person shot, as what happened once in Israel, or
B: the SRO might be Scot Peterson from Florida

pegasus

Discussion Starter · #9 · Mar 23, 2018

Someone recently made me aware this half hour documentary was produced a year or two ago, not new. Sorry. From a news clip it sounds like a documentary on the Buckeye Firearms Program called FASTER, which is a good program.

olfarhors

· #10 · Mar 24, 2018

To me the common sense approach is to allow teachers that wish to carry and under go certification/training to do so, pay them a 5-10% bonus pay as well , as long as they remain certified and under go training.
more people there to be armed, no additional real benefits program ( Legacy cost are what eats up government money). and likely you don't have a problem with 1-2-3 individuals all being out sick, vacation, or doctors appointments at one time.

kmw1954

· #11 · Mar 24, 2018

To look deeper, Biometric Lock Boxes for pistols are under $200.00 and every teachers desk should be equipped with one whether they put a gun in it or not. Just the thought that there may be one in there would be a starting deterrent. Heck I would gladly donate the cost of one to each school on my school district.

I am a believer in this idea and also understand the limitations and ramifications of such a program. I totally understand that not every teacher wants to participate or be responsible for taking another's life and agree that they should not be put in that position against their wishes. Until we can figure out how to secure complete buildings w/o making them look like prisons then we need to at least secure rooms.

Lastly we as humans face tragedies in many shapes, forms and degree every day. That will never change. For instance the poor families that lost members with the bridge collapse.

osbornk

· #12 · Mar 24, 2018

I think you could make it possible for some teachers to be armed without any cost at all. The teachers or other school personnel that would want to carry would already be gun owners and they would volunteer to carry concealed and use their own personal gun. The NRA, local police department personnel or other gun clubs would volunteer to do the necessary training. It's not that a lot of school employees would be armed but the possibility that they are armed is what would keep the shooters from attacking.

Reactions: 2

kschilk

· #13 · Mar 25, 2018

If teachers purchase the weapons for school defense, that'd make them tax deductible as well as practice ammo, training and other related expenses. I deducted my Judge Mag as a business expense, as well as all the ammo I run through it at the range. Sometimes I go shooting with my "gun friends" who are also customers so I deduct all the ammo I shoot through all of the guns I take. Some do "businesses lunches" with their customers...:wink:...I do "business range time" with mine.

Reactions: 2

Justice06RR

· #14 · Mar 28, 2018

Let me put some more insight into teachers carrying guns:

2 of my sisters are elementary school teachers. One teaches 3rd, and the other 4th grade. Last weekend during a family dinner, one of them told me that they had a long meeting of faculty/teachers about if teachers should be armed. A Police officer was present during this meeting to answer their questions.

The bad news is, both of my sisters didn't want to carry guns if given the option. I don't know if this is a girl thing or something else, because both of my sisters know that I'm a gun enthusiast and I've taken them to the range before (but they didn't seem to like it).

IMHO the option should be available to teachers/faculty if they choose to carry; make it voluntary and give them free training and discount on guns if they don't have their own. Firearms safety and training should be complimentary or sponsored by the city/county.

Then increase and tighten security in schools. For example, the high school I attended only has 2 accessible exits that both have a school employee watching the gate entrance/exit. Everyone going in and out gets checked. Then there is one off-duty Deputy inside the school with his patrol car visibly parked. I'm in Central FL btw, so I don't see why this can't be effective.

(Granted, I didn't follow the details of Parkland. I heard there was a cop there already? Apologies in advance)

See less See more

Reactions: 2

kshunter

· #15 · Mar 28, 2018

I agree with it being voluntary and an option. The news is spinning it as "arming all teachers"which is wrong. You cannot force people who are uncomfortable around firearms to carry one and expect them to use it or even be able to operate and control it.

Reactions: 2

olfarhors

· #16 · Mar 28, 2018

kshunter said:
I agree with it being voluntary and an option. The news is spinning it as "arming all teachers"which is wrong. You cannot force people who are uncomfortable around firearms to carry one and expect them to use it or even be able to operate and control it.

EXACTLY
that would be as stupid as say getting people to show up in a group that have no idea of who is running for a particular office, have no idea of what these peoples ideas or back grounds are, providing them a way to get to the voting place and telling them on the way who to vote for, I mean----AHH-- Never Mind I just thought about what I was saying!!!--------

ICUKev

· #17 · Mar 28, 2018

NPR did a segment that brought up arming teachers and I was impressed with the prospective. They talked about what maybe good for metro areas isn't for other locations. They talked about rural areas can't afford to pay for resource officers (up to 80% of their pay) and local police short staffed. One district here in Missouri stated that police response would be 10 mins away. As a result, they've been arming teachers since 2013. Some local security company has been training them. I couldn't believe (yes I could) the media won't share that info as they talk about if it's a good idea to arm teachers?

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.