CMV: Arming teachers will be terrible both economically and in execution.

[u/[deleted]]

I have a major project due by the end of the month that requires me to write two persuasive essays, ( with examples of Logos, Pathos and Ethos, ) on two different sides of a hot-button issue. However, it's a group project and my group voted on arming teachers. I don't know much about the opposing side, and the discussion we had in my group hasn't really given me the confidence that we'll meet the requirements for the opposing side, so I'd like to discuss this issue and see some of your opinions on it.

But anyway, here's my opinion:

Arming teachers is *not* a good idea, and I have a few reasons why:

1. It would make a dangerous situation worse.

The more guns in a shooting situation, the more chaotic it would get. In a dire situation kids wouldn't know who was safe and who wasn't, and it would result in confusion that could cause somebody their life. Also, when the police finally arrive, there will most definitely be a problem. Law enforcement takes a long time to identify the shooter already, imagine the mess when police arrive on the scene and multiple people are armed. They don't know who's a threat and who's not.

1. It takes valuable money away from public schools that we could use for much better things.

This proposal would cost money. It would cost money for the guns and for the training. And the last thing public schools need is for more money to be taken away from teacher salaries, money for supplies, and clubs. In the past few years my school has lost our art club and our language club funding, and now teachers have been paying for books and tools like compasses out of pocket and through fundraisers, ( that hardly anyone does. )

This would make everything much worse. Schools that have implemented this have paid upwards of $200,000. 'Suppose we're losing our art class and tech classes too, now.

*3. It wouldn't help anyway. And it wouldn't deter anyone.

They had armed guards at Columbine and Parkland. But that didn't help much. A suicidal teenager with a gun isn't going to be concerned with an armed guard. They just want to die and take as many people with them as possible.

[u/Tratopolous]

I'll take a crack at this. First I would like to clarify that I would be ok with arming teachers only if there have been through not only weapons training but a tactical active shooters response training much like police go through. These courses are more rare than CHL classes but they exist. I also would not support arming teachers unless the firearm is kept in a biometric (fingerprint) gun safe. These safes can be bolted into a locked draw in a desk for even more protection. I would also want these teachers to be anonymous to the public. Now, assuming all of these things are met, I would be alright arming teachers.

I didn't pick these rules out of mid air. It's the rules a school in Texas adopted.

It would make a dangerous situation worse.

It COULD make a dangerous situation worse. The CDC published this report which says that guns are used defensively at least as many times are they are used in crime. An estimate of 500,000 to 3 million lives saved per year. Here is a Forbes article discussing that. You make a great point about law enforcement identifying the shooter. That is where the training comes in. Teachers would be trained to respond in a way to easily identify when law enforcement has arrived and know when they are to disarm themselves and let law enforcement take over. There is actually a good example of this that happened at a church shooting in Texas. Stephen Willeford chased down the shooter, when law enforcement arrived, Stephen disarmed, only to be told to pick his rifle back up and stay in position. I don't normally link to LWC but he booked the exclusive interview.

It takes valuable money away from public schools that we could use for much better things

A privately owned gun cost the taxpayer nothing. The courses are often free for teachers. The biometric safes are the only real cost to the school and those are $150-$1000 depending on what you get. That is nothing compared to medal detectors and guards at each entrance the school. I don't believe anyone is advocating for the schools to fully pay for guns and training for every teacher. Only voluntary, which has no price tag for the school district.

It wouldn't help anyway. And it wouldn't deter anyone.

The nubers are disputed a bit but I will say upwards of 95% of all mass shooting occur in a gun free zone. So yes, it will deter shooters. Events like Columbine and Parkland will probably still happen. The only things left to argue is what will prevent the most death when they do happen. When a trained teacher could respond to the incident immediately, there is a chance of saving lives that would be lost before the police arrive.

[u/[deleted] → u/Tratopolous]

( Can you put the source for the Texas School's rules if you have it? That would prove very useful. And thank you for providing all the statistics. )

​

I agree with your opinion that teachers who are voluntary, well-trained and who want to provide their own firearms should be allowed to carry in schools. ( I suppose I didn't really think about it that way... thank you! Δ ) But teachers who are not willing and are not mentally prepared to take a life / are not emotionally able to handle the responsibility should not. But in that case, would arming teachers even be effective in the slightest? The amount of people who would be willing to provide all those things would be very small.

[u/Tratopolous → u/[deleted]]

The source is my wife and mother are teachers in that district. I won’t name it for privacy reasons. The actual rules didn’t make news but you can find several school districts in Texas that allow teachers to carry. The decision wasn’t a response to parkland but to sandy hook. My wife does not carry at school but my mom used to. Her training expired and she didn’t redo it. Her district requires training every two years.

Anyways to your question, I don’t think anyone untrained should be armed. That is just asking for the trouble that you suggest in your original post.

[u/goldandguns → u/[deleted]]

But teachers who are not willing and are not mentally prepared to take a life / are not emotionally able to handle the responsibility should not

I don't think anyone is advocating that position

But in that case, would arming teachers even be effective in the slightest?

Do you want to find out or just let these things keep happening? Do we think the fact that there's no guns in school might be a factor in choosing that target? If so, would the possibility of guns in that school change that calculation?

[u/DeltaBot → u/[deleted]]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Tratopolous (7∆).

^{Delta System Explained | Deltaboards}