Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Florida Senate votes to restrict gun sales, arm teachers

4 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Telstar

Telstar

But Florida Democratic Party Chair Terrie Rizzo was unimpressed. After SB 7026 passed the Senate Monday evening, Rizzo issued a statement saying, "This is not the legislation the Parkland students fought for — this does not go far enough to protect our students from gun violence."


https://www.news-press.com/story/news/politics/2018/03/05/florida-senate-votes-restrict-gun-sales-arm-teachers/397587002/

Guest


Guest

Arming teachers is going to backfire bigly. Sad

PkrBum

PkrBum

Worse than gun free zones?

Deus X

Deus X

panhandler wrote:Arming teachers is going to backfire bigly.

Yeah, some jock-bully of a coach will snap and we'll have to rethink this lunacy.

PkrBum

PkrBum

http://www.wsaz.com/content/news/Local-school-district-has-been-arming-teachers-for-years-475340013.html

IRONTON, Ohio (WSAZ) -- The debate over arming teachers is heating up across the country but one school in our region has already been doing so for years.

Rock Hill Superintendent Wes Hairston says the district started arming teachers and staff after the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012.

Arming teachers is legal in Ohio. School boards are allowed by law to quietly authorize staff to carry concealed weapons in school, but at Rock Hill it's no secret.

Signs are posted at every entrance reading, "Rock Hill Local School District staff is trained and armed. Any attempt to harm children or staff will be met with whatever force necessary to protect our students."

Hairston says it serves as a warning, "If you come here and you intend to harm any students or staff, you're going to meet resistance and it's going to happen quickly."

The district tested the measure with a few teachers initially before training several more staff members in 2013 and going public with the initiative in 2014.

Due to safety concerns, Hairston will not say who is armed, how many teachers are armed and where they are located, information he says even the school board doesn't know. But he does say that they're well armed in every school.

"It's not a panacea and it's not a guarantee of absolute safety but we feel pretty confident that if we had an active shooter situation that we could neutralize it fairly quickly," Hairston said.

One of the biggest concerns over proposals in other states surrounds training of teachers. At Rock Hill, Hairston says the training is intense and strict.

"It's not just a situation where they have concealed carry, that's not nearly enough," Hairston said. "We expect our people to be able to shoot as well as the Ohio Highway Patrolmen."

Teachers undergo training at the Tactical Defense Institute in West Union, Ohio. They are also trained through FASTER, or Faculty/Administrator Safety Training and Emergency Response. It's a program designed specifically for educators.

Hairston says teachers also undergo scenario training. He says there are strict requirements to pass and teachers are tested at least twice a year.

"This is not like we just found folks that want to put a gun on and want to conceal carry," Hairston said. "That's just simply not enough."

He says it's also not for everyone.

"We spend a great deal of time studying our staff. It's not just having the physical ability to shoot a gun, it has to be people that are mentally stable that can handle high pressure situations and can make a differentiation or distinction between between someone who is just angry and someone who plans to come into the building and inflict harm on our students or staff," Hairston said.

He also stresses that the decision is not about politics.

"This is not about liberal versus conservative, republican versus democrat," Hairston said. "It's about protecting children and staff and purely that, nothing more, nothing less. We will go to every length possible to make sure we will keep our staff and students safe."

The district already has several other safety measures in place. Hairston says arming teachers is the last option.

Every room is equipped with barriers that can be placed underneath classroom doors during a lock-down. They also have trauma kits that include tourniquets and chest wound bandages.

Deus X

Deus X

Florida Senate votes to restrict gun sales, arm teachers Eabuztn

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:Worse than gun free zones?

Yes, much worse than gun free zones.

Sad thing is... If they arm teachers, you will see it and still disagree.

2seaoat



Worse than gun free zones?

John Doe my next door neighbor took his front door off the hinges and his home was wide open to the public.  People would walk into his home and commit crimes when he had no barrier to entry.   Would his first solution be to put the door back up and secure his building envelope from unwanted intruders, or pay an armed guard to sit in his living room for fifty thousand a year? Would people be saying if only John Doe had a gun? You know his home is a gun free zone.

The very idea that the NRA salivates in their goal of every person in America carrying around a firearm, but why are guns even being discussed when our schools are wide open.    Part of the solution is:

bullet proof glass on entry doors at 25 bucks a square foot, electronic wireless locks at three hundred per door, 16 security cameras for one thousand bucks, and an exterior security checkpoint where all visitors and students pass which can detect metal and only after they have been checked at least 100 feet from the locked front doors can they enter the building.  If a person is stopped outside the school, common sense would say that ninety percent of these incidents would go away.  

Why the use of gun free zone, unless you are a stooge for the NRA.  I would rather the truth be told.   A no security zone would be more appropriate because security does not equal a gun no matter how much propaganda the NRA spews.  Physically secure buildings which do not allow easy access and where LEO can arrive with a shooter outside and not in the building.

PkrBum

PkrBum

I can agree that gun free soft targets have to go. That idea was stupid or naive... likely a worse combination. The govt needs to protect the kids... or let the schools. No more sitting ducks. There also needs to be a due process to intercede with mental cases... just more common sense within the constitution.

Deus X

Deus X

2seaoat wrote:Worse than gun free zones?

John Doe my next door neighbor took his front door off the hinges and his home was wide open to the public.  People would walk into his home and commit crimes when he had no barrier to entry.   Would his first solution be to put the door back up and secure his building envelope from unwanted intruders, or pay an armed guard to sit in his living room for fifty thousand a year?  Would people be saying if only John Doe had a gun?  You know his home is a gun free zone.

The very idea that the NRA salivates in their goal of every person in America carrying around a firearm, but why are guns even being discussed when our schools are wide open.    Part of the solution is:

bullet proof glass on entry doors at 25 bucks a square foot, electronic wireless locks at three hundred per door, 16 security cameras for one thousand bucks, and an exterior security checkpoint where all visitors and students pass which can detect metal and only after they have been checked at least 100 feet from the locked front doors can they enter the building.  If a person is stopped outside the school, common sense would say that ninety percent of these incidents would go away.  

Why the use of gun free zone, unless you are a stooge for the NRA.  I would rather the truth be told.   A no security zone would be more appropriate because security does not equal a gun no matter how much propaganda the NRA spews.  Physically secure buildings which do not allow easy access and where LEO can arrive with a shooter outside and not in the building.

School shootings are only a fraction of all mass shootings. What about the rest of the "soft" targets, like shopping malls, open-air concerts, stadiums etc.? Should we harden all of them as well?

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum