Despite Parkland’s opposition, Florida House panel votes to arm teachers

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by samcraig, Feb 27, 2018.

  1. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #1
    Facing anguished relatives and classmates of shooting victims, a panel of Florida legislators took the unprecedented step Tuesday of creating a new statewide program to put armed teachers in classrooms — over the vocal opposition of Parkland residents.

    Voting along party lines, the House Appropriations Committee approved training teachers to carry guns in class under the direction of local law enforcement — if superintendents or school boards approve.

    The $67 million "school marshal" program is the most controversial aspect of a House bill that imposes a three-day waiting period for gun purchases, raises the age to buy any gun from 18 to 21 and gives police more power to seize guns from people who threaten themselves or others. Most of the money for the marshal program would be spent on training.

    Oliva said the bill doesn't address whether teachers would be provided guns or would have to buy them. He said that should be decided locally by school boards and superintendents.

    The goal: 10 marshals (teachers trained to carry a gun) in every school, which would equate to 37,000 statewide. The state would cover the costs of background checks, drug testing, psychological exams and 132 hours of training. The bill does provide a one-time $500 stipend for those who volunteer to have a gun.

    The bill also calls for spending $400 million to put a school resource officer in every school, improve mental health counseling and make public school buildings safer.

    More via link
    http://www.tampabay.com/florida-pol...a-house-panel-rejects-ban-on-assault-weapons/

    Bold is mine and important. Some positive things - but I'm not a fan of more guns in schools.
     
  2. 0007776 Suspended

    0007776

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #2
    Why not put this money towards educating kids? If we can increase school budgets to put guns in them why not increase them to put school supplies that teachers didn’t have to pay for out of their own pockets in classrooms?
     
  3. chabig, Feb 27, 2018
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2018

    chabig macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    #3
    I’m an airline pilot. Nobody was permitted to carry firearms on airplanes before 9/11. After that, I suppose the lawmakers could have just passed more laws to declare airliners “gun free zones” but instead they chose to implement a program to permit vetted pilots to receive appropriate training allowing us to carry firearms on the airplane for the purpose of defense. That program still exists today, about 15 years later, and not one person has been killed as a result. I don’t see why a group of select, volunteer, teachers with appropriate training and equipment couldn’t do a lot to improve the security of schools. At least it should make bad actors think twice before heading out to do harm. Every time I see a “No firearms allowed” sign I read it as “Bad guys come in, we’re all unarmed!”
     
  4. jeyf macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    #4
    big difference from a airline pilot and a teacher.
     
  5. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #5
    Yea, there’s not exactly an epidemic of plane shootings so why the comparison was brought up is funny to think about.

    I expect we’ll see the old Simpson’s “Tiger Rock” scenario play out in this thread.
     
  6. ZapNZs macrumors 68020

    ZapNZs

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2017
    #6
    I am very curious to see the results of this, in what has been discussed for years, but is arguably the first 'pilot program' to go into action.

    While this has been discussed as a great idea/terrible idea by different people on different sides of the aisle, I'm not sure if we can say with certainty whether this yields more benefit, more harm, equal benefit & harm, or no difference at all until it goes into effect. It certainly seems the quality of the screening, the quality of the training aspect, potentially coupled with common-sense gun control and behavior modification could play a big role in the outcome.

    The potential impact this would have on gun violence statistics overall seems low, given the primary goal of this is probably aiming to attempt to address spree killings, and how a large bulk of gun deaths are not from mass shootings.
     
  7. 0007776 Suspended

    0007776

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #7
    But most school shooters go in expecting to die. For a lot of them the goal is suicide by cop since they are too scared to kill themselves and they decide to take people with them. Arming teachers could potentially encourage more suicidal teens to bring guns to school since it makes it even easier for them to commit suicide without pointing the gun at themselves and pulling the trigger.
     
  8. mac_in_tosh macrumors 6502

    mac_in_tosh

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Location:
    Earth
    #8
    I guess because the NRA doesn't want that.
     
  9. TonyC28 macrumors 65816

    TonyC28

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #9
    Can you provide a link to any documentation showing the NRA’s opposition to school funding?
     
  10. LizKat macrumors 601

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #10
    Yes and imagine a teacher having to shoot to kill some kid who may have been her former student. Does the law say the school will pick up the tab for the teacher's shrink bills after she kills a teenaged school shooter? And what if she hits some other kid? Everyone's all over that deputy for not going in at all but there's the flip side too, the question of "collateral damage" by armed responders who do head into an active shooter situation.
     
  11. TonyC28 macrumors 65816

    TonyC28

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #11
    Yea that would be traumatic. No doubt. But I wonder, would that be less traumatic than dying?

    I would be in favor of the school/municipality/county/state picking up that bill.
     
  12. linuxcooldude macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    #12
    That is about the lamest theory I've heard yet. If they are so suicidal, why don't they do a mass shooting at a police station? I'm sure they would gladly help out in that regard. A school isn't the most ideal place to want to get shot and killed. They chose schools because of large amount of people, low security. Most don't seem to have a problem of shooting themselves if it comes to it.
     
  13. ericgtr12 macrumors 65816

    ericgtr12

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
  14. mac_in_tosh macrumors 6502

    mac_in_tosh

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Location:
    Earth
    #14
    School budgets are very stressed in most places. By pushing the ridiculous idea of arming teachers, which of course their obedient legislators agree with, that wasted money further erodes funding for traditional learning. So it's indirect but the result is the same.
     
  15. TonyC28 macrumors 65816

    TonyC28

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #15
    Was that a “no”?
     
  16. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
  17. mac_in_tosh macrumors 6502

    mac_in_tosh

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Location:
    Earth
    #17
    No to a direct link. But mrkramer's post was about the best use of limited school resources, and the NRA is playing a role in setting priorities. So as I said, it's indirect but the result is the same. Shall we do away with art classes so schools can buy guns and spend money on training teachers to confront shooters with assault rifles?
     
  18. TonyC28 macrumors 65816

    TonyC28

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #18
    No. Is that what is being proposed, though? I thought the question was about a budget increase.
     
  19. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #19
    Maybe because a mass shooting at a police station wouldn’t likely result in a mass shooting? I doubt that you know enough about why people shoot up schools but it does seem clear that they expect to get killed. Even if they don’t, why is it now the job of someone who just wants to teach to stop an attack?

    And for those who think this needs to be trialled to find out. How about trialling a gun buy back scheme and making it illegal to buy a semi or fully automatic weapon? And educating teachers on how to spot a student in distress? And equipping all schools with counsellors who can assist troubled students? And actually removing the likelihood of a small child even seeing a gun at school?

    Also, who takes responsibility when one of these armed teachers gets a bit depressed about the constant stress of a classroom they can’t control and flips, resulting in more dead kids?

    Also, will these teachers be armed with fully automatic weapons to level the playing field against a lunatic with an arsenal of guns?
     
  20. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #20
    So how long until we see the first teacher on a murder charge, you reckon?
     
  21. Rogifan macrumors Core

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #21
    This should be something local school districts decide not government.
     
  22. SoggyCheese Suspended

    SoggyCheese

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2016
    Location:
    Barcelona, España o Londres, Reino Unido
    #22
    I’m sure we can provide plenty of evidence that they prefer gun sales over every other possible thing.

    Because that’s all they care about, squeezing more dollars out of every American. They don’t care about schools or anything else for that matter. They treat their supporters like idiots and fools, dumb cash cows to milk.

    Still, right now they would be right in that. You would HAVE to be an idiot or a fool to support the NRA at this time. Their current positions and actions are indefensible.

    How many kids have to die before people “who like guns” understand that the free for all policy does not work? 100? 1000? 100,000? How many before their supporters finally wake up to what the NRA is actually about?
     
  23. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #23
    More guns = more gun violence. That is the simple, cold basic math.

    They argue we need armed people. There were deputies who didn’t respond. Now they’re back to blaming video games and movies.

    Teachers are people too, just like anyone else, and prone to crimes like anyone else.
     
  24. chagla macrumors 6502a

    chagla

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    #24
    are you saying that armed pilot/teacher can't go rogue themselves? in that case, we should really arm the kids so that the teacher will think twice before shooting the kids. yes?

    also, speaking of gun free events, why events like CPAC don't allow guns? after all they are the strongest supporters of everyone carrying a gun. no?
     
  25. TonyC28 macrumors 65816

    TonyC28

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #25
    What’s the solution?
     

Share This Page

53 February 27, 2018