NFR A Guardian Teacher Law

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Brad Soliday, Dec 18, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brad Soliday New Member

    Posts: 6
    Ratings: +15 / 0
    Please forgive me for posting a non-fishing thread, but the recent violence in Conn. has weighed heavily on my heart. I'm a teacher of 18 years and an avid fly fisherman... The members of this board represent a broad political spectrum and i wanted to bounce the following legislative idea off all of you as i believe it can relatively quickly make our schools safer (if passed). thank you

    brad


    Individual local school boards in Washington State should be allowed to issue “Guardian Teacher Permits.” The Guardian Teacher Permit would be a concealed weapons permit + 1. The Guardian Teacher or Administrator would be allowed to carry a concealed weapon onto school grounds during their work day. The following is a basic outline of what might be included in said legislation:

    1. Guardian Teachers or Administrators would be selected and approved by local school districts (built in vetting process that costs the state nothing).

    2. Participation in this program would be completely optional. No school district would have to participate.

    3. Guardian Teacher applications could be submitted to the state for additional background checks (which teachers have already passed).

    4. Only teachers with impeccable employee record would be eligible. Guardian Status could be revoked at any time by the school board under their discretion.

    5. Automatic suspension of Guardian status for any of the following: DWI, or violations of the law above or beyond a speeding ticket, and for receiving an employee reprimand.

    6. Guardian teachers would be required to attend some type of training (two to four days, at employee or district cost), covering their role and responsibility as a Guardian teacher, gun safety, and pass a basic marksmanship course.

    7. Guardian teachers would be under direction to keep an absolutely low profile (we don’t talk about guardian teachers….” If you have questions ask the district office.”

    8. Only teachers/administrators with a proven record of service and professionalism would be eligible.

    Rational:

    1. Our schools have proven the most vulnerable targets in our society for the violence of demented minds. As a society we have no more precious treasure than our children, yet we guard armored trucks better than our schools.

    2. The cost of having full time protection from police officers or trained and armed security guards is more than most districts can afford.

    3. Regardless of anyone’s position on gun control legislation or the passage of future gun control laws, it is likely that these acts of insanity will plague our society well into the future. A Guardian Teacher law could make our schools safer in a matter of weeks (if passed).

    4. The mere knowledge that Guardian Teachers are present in a school may dissuade potential attacks.

    5. There seems to be an ever increasing number of disturbed people who view our children as targets. As there are wolves in our world, let us put Guardians among the lambs.
  2. Steve Saville Active Member

    Posts: 2,512
    Tacoma, WA
    Ratings: +341 / 1
    The reason children are targets is because they are the most vulnerable citizens we have and for the most part are unable to fight back. i am/was a teacher for 26 years. I can't see this happening in any school district a s it goes against the fundemental teaching that we involve ourselves in. I don't want anyone carrying a gun around in my school building where there could be an accident. That solves nothing. I'm not anti-gun nor do I want to give mine up but putting guns in schools solves nothing, in my opinion.
    stilly stalker and jwg like this.
  3. Lugan Joe Streamer

    Posts: 2,394
    Beautiful View, WA
    Ratings: +774 / 2
    I've been thinking a lot about this solution (or something like it) even before this CT massacre. I'm on the PTSA Board at my kids' elementary school. I am at the school once a week at least to tutor kids. From the first day of school two years ago when my oldest started there, I was immediately struck by how open the access to the school is. It remains so today. The school district's website posted a special bulletin after the CT massacre touting its security measures. I read that and thought it was more of an open advertisement for a lunatic to come to one of our schools. There is simply no deterrence of any significance. Then I look at the few times a school shooter was stopped in his tracks by an armed staff member. Wasn't there such an incident in a high school in AL or MS a decade or so ago? Makes me wonder if that is the answer.

    On the other hand, I'm worried about asking staff to pack weapons. I know my school's staff well. They are excellent teachers and administrators. I don't see many of them being able to handle a firefight like a cop. Maybe I am wrong, but in my estimation, only two or three of the male staff could do it. Maybe that's enough; maybe not. I also worry about the unintended consequences, as Steve points out.

    Maybe there is a third solution: Post a cop at every school (in addition to other security measures like hardening entrances to buildings and classrooms). Many high schools already have armed police full time. Maybe that needs to trickle down to elementary schools. It would be expensive, but as gun rights advocates are fond of saying, "freedom isn't free". Maybe our kids' freedom to learn in peace is worth the financial cost.
    Robert Engleheart and dflett68 like this.
  4. Be Jofus G Banned or Parked

    Posts: 2,051
    Washington
    Ratings: +53 / 0
    Please do not give teachers guns. Teachers snap all the time. It's a very stressfull and thankless job. there are many recently unemployed men who have literally sent hundreds of thousands of rounds downrange. They are also already trained for urban combat. I'm sure some would appreciate the job. For a teacher It would be like working 2 full time jobs to train to be ready for a situation that would require an armed response. It's best that teachers concentrate on making kids smarter and let the pros do what they do.
    Jamie Wilson and dryflylarry like this.
  5. GAT Active Member

    Posts: 4,140
    Willamette Valley, OR
    Ratings: +2,663 / 0
    I lean toward Lugan's plan.
  6. Patrick Gould Active Member

    Posts: 2,356
    Ellensburg, WA
    Ratings: +688 / 1
    Sensible
  7. Grayone Fishin' to the end, Oc.P

    Posts: 1,338
    boring, oregon
    Ratings: +111 / 0
  8. stilly stalker Tuna sniffer

    Posts: 1,763
    Carlsbad, CA
    Ratings: +401 / 0
    Where I went to school when I was young, there were cops there every day, and guns found every week in kids lockers. In 6th grade.
    Guardian teacher... no way. Not anywhere Id send my kids to school. Id rather have a cop on duty at the school.
  9. Dave Alberts Member

    Posts: 232
    Lakewood, WA
    Ratings: +24 / 0
    As the spouse of a dedicated teacher for more than forty years, a life long shooting sports entheusiast, a father and a grandfather, and a former Marine, I too have strong feelings about school safety in particular, and societial safety in general. The NewTown tragedy has left us all numb, and truly heart broken. But what do we do to prevent such sensless acts in the future...

    First, I commend Brad for thinking "outside the box" and clearly putting his plan to print. I believe this approach, or something similar could work, but probably would not get past the prejudices and high emotion that Steve has referenced. Guns are not the problem, nor are guns alone the solution to our security issues.

    Instead of arming selected teachers with firearms that make loud noises, how about non-lethal devices such as stun guns, tasers, or something as novel as "bear spray"--the real stuff, not the "bad dog variety"... Most teachers I have known are non-violent and non-confrontational by nature, and would find it at least difficult to pull the trigger of a firearm, regardless of the danger to themselves or others, but could most likely be trained and desensitized to be able to use a non-lethal device effectively. One could also make a compelling case for their "non-lethal" nature in the event of an accident or "colateral injury".

    Or, how about we put our school "mascots" to work...every school has a mascot--an owl, a cougar, a bear, and possibly a school house cat... How about we have school house dogs...big ones, well trained, and with big teeth! We see all of the specialty gear carried by special ops wardogs these days, why not use them in schools and other vulnerable places too? We all know that there is nothing short of mothers, maybe, that is more protective of kids than the family dog. Train them, give them free range of the school and grounds with their camera packs and microphones sending back to the office monitor...not many bad guys would challenge them.

    To fix these problems in our society though, we must all be truly commited to solutions, rather than just pandering to a special interest group, or political party. Is that possible in today's world??
    bitterroot and Lugan like this.
  10. Brad Soliday New Member

    Posts: 6
    Ratings: +15 / 0
    In regards to the concerns expressed so far.
    I've taught for 18 years, and have not "snapped" yet. Very few teachers "snap." Probably fewer than police who snap. The plan above is not a solution... NO ONE has a solution... its just mitigation. Armed security or police in every school is finacially impractical. A few armed teachers cost next to nothing. I work in a small school district but can count several teachers and administrators that would be comfortable and trusted to carry a weapon. I'm only asking for selected willing teachers... vetted by years of experience and proven professionalism. They would not be a substitute for police... they don't need to be trained to the level of a police officer, they likely would never use the weapon.... they would be there to give children seconds to escape, or hopefully stop a shooter. As far as accidents... ask a police officer how many times his gun accidently goes off during his career... school shottings probably happen more often in our society. additional safety proticol could be established to reduce the likelyhood of "accidents" (no round in the chamber).
    I am haunted by the pictures of those children... i want my kids to be protected, i want to protect the kids in my classroom with something other than a stapler. There are thousands of competent, stable, trusted teachers who could be more than just bullet stoppers in our schools. Let them be a guardian.
    Ed Call, speyfisher and Lugan like this.
  11. kjsteelhead Member

    Posts: 157
    Bellingham, Washington
    Ratings: +16 / 0
    Brad, I had similar thoughts on Friday. If I had a gun and that S.O.B. came into our school...

    But I think the bastard picked an elementary school because he new no one would fight back. Do you really think primary teachers would be packing if they were allowed to?

    Also, as a teacher going through the chaotic halls of a middle school, you spend a great deal of time greeting and talking to the kids. I'd hate to be walking the halls thinking about making sure one of the less-stable kids doesn't try to grab my sidearm and do something stupid with it.

    I like the idea of school resource officers in all schools that would have a social-worker type role that backs up our already-overloaded school counselors. Bring back the DARE programs, add other similar programs, and split the cost between district and local police.

    The first thing I'd like to see, however, is for all of you whose kids have violent video games at home, get rid of the damn games! What are they teaching? Also, don't have you or your kids watch all of the crime and murder and violent crap that we have on T.V. You are you kids' primary role model. The kids are being constantly bombarded with the message of, "If you get mad, solve it with violence."
  12. speyfisher Active Member

    Posts: 1,064
    State of Jefferson U.S.A.
    Ratings: +139 / 3
    We hear this same old sh!t every time something like this happens. "reasonable gun controls" "compromise" (liberal speak for capitulate) yada, ,yada, yada. WTF have you ******* liberals compromised? Most of you are so paranoid about guns, yet you have no idea what you are talking about. To hear you tell it, you would think a gun would go off just by looking at it. You go into a bank that has armed guards and think nothing of it. Do you think those armed guards are are trained police? They are private contractors. Bitch & moan about a couple of administrators being armed, but it's OK to make your kids cower in a corner watching their friends get shot up until the police get there.

    Yet it's OK for your kids to be bombarded every day with violent video games. I see nothing good in a game where the object is to kill as many people as you can within a given period of time. Even if they are supposed to be bad guys. Screw it. Ban and confiscate them all! Oh, we can't restrict content you say. That would violate some game manufacturers first amendment rights. Too f***in bad. Is their first amendment right to pollute your kid's mind with such crap more important than someone trying to protect your kid with a gun?

    And while we're addressing the subject of first amendment rights, how about some restrictions on the media? Like quit sensationalizing these acts of violence. One paragraph on page four with no mention of the shooters name. Or one small mention of the crime on the moving strip at the bottom of the screen. Why should the shooter get any fame or glory for committing these heinous crimes? Why should the media be allowed to capitalize on it either? Screw them too! Leave these victims and their survivors alone, to heal in peace.....My side has made enough concessions. It's your turn.
    Don Freeman likes this.
  13. mtskibum16 Active Member

    Posts: 1,031
    Puget Sound Beaches
    Ratings: +272 / 0
    I think the price of more police patrolling the schools would be money well spent. If not an officer at every school, then perhaps a patrol that covers a couple schools randomly throughout the day. Hell even a police vehicle parked at each school (with the random patrol) would be a start. I know I've been fooled on the highway before by an empty police cruiser parked on the side of the road. It seems a shooter would think twice about walking past a police car while entering a school.
    Lugan likes this.
  14. Steve Saville Active Member

    Posts: 2,512
    Tacoma, WA
    Ratings: +341 / 1
    I retired as a full time teacher in June but I'm back in school as a substitute regularly. I'm at school today and there was a Des Moines Police Officer in our building this morning. I asked if he was here because of the Newtown incident and he told me that yes he was here to make the children more comfortable and to let the community know that the police are present and aware of what's going on. He won't be here full time but is near if needed. That's a much better solution and the kids are much more at ease today after seeing him here. Two thumbs up for the DPD.
    triploidjunkie likes this.
  15. Jason Rolfe Wanderer

    Posts: 1,178
    the beach
    Ratings: +373 / 0
    So let me get this straight:

    You get pissed off when someone suggests that people take another look at gun control because one crazy person massacred a bunch of kids. You're basically saying, all the rest of us law-abiding citizens shouldn't be punished for the mistakes of one or a few.

    BUT, it's okay to completely ban video games--something that millions enjoy responsibly--because of the actions of one person, or a few.

    So as long as it's something you love and understand (guns), you think no one should touch it. But if it is something you disapprove of and don't understand (video games) you think it should be okay to completely ban it.

    Great logic there. And for the record, I don't own a gun, but I also don't think banning guns is the solution. I do play video games occasionally, though I'm not an avid gamer.

    Jason
  16. Jeff Sawyer Active Member

    Posts: 449
    Tacoma WA
    Ratings: +248 / 0
    No, I do not believe arming teachers is the answer! I'm not anti-gun, I own several myself, I just see too many things that could go wrong with that scenario.

    I think a better approach is to keep guns out of schools. Most of us have phones in our pockets that can do everything from turning the lights on/off at home when we're on the other side of the country, to watching movies, updating our WFF post and surfing porn. We have the ability drop bombs from the stratusphere and fly them thur a freaking window. We put someone on the moon over 40 years ago.

    You mean to tell me someone couldn't create a door or turn-stile connected to a metal detector that wouldn't open or allow an individual in if they were packing. We don't even have to get that technical...how about secure doors and windows, allow passage to individuals with a code. That little skinny disturbed piece of shit forced his way in...alot can be done to prevent that without bringing more guns into our schools.
  17. Chris Bellows The Thought Train

    Posts: 1,680
    The Salt
    Ratings: +823 / 0
    [IMG]

    [IMG]

    [IMG]

    Washington Post
    Lugan and Jason Rolfe like this.
  18. o mykiss Active Member

    Posts: 1,305
    .
    Ratings: +180 / 0
    I might be in favor of something like that described in the original post except I wouldn't have the permit issued by the school board, I would have it issued by law enforcement agency. School board would opt into program but the licensing and training program should be handled by law enforcement. I would also require an annual or maybe semi-annual license that includes pyschological testing. And I would also require some hard core marksmanship and gun safety training - not 2-4 hourse but something more like what police cadets have to go through. Finally, weapon is kept in super secure safe overnight, issued by an administrator or safety officer to the licensed person in the morning when he/she arrives, and is returned to the safe at the end of the day.

    On the other hand, I would rather have LEO at every school and pay for it through additional taxes on sales of semi-automatic weapons and high capacity magazines.

    Speyfisher, your rant reminded me of something I've been thinking about a lot in the last several days. There are obviously a lot of very good folks (on this board and elsewhere) who are passionate about firearms and bristle at any attempt by the government to regulate them. Some of them can at least express themselves in a civil way; not sure your approach is going to win any converts but I'm guessing you do not care. That said, I am constantly frustrated by the fact that guys like you are so unwilling to consider what could be done in terms of regulating access to firearms to reduce the level of gun violence in our country. You are not capable of being objective if you are unwilling to admit that part of the problem is how easy it is in this country to obtain the sorts of firearms used in Newtown, a couple weeks ago in Oregon, in the Aurora, CO shootings last year, and in thousands of handgun-related homicides each year that get way less attention. That sort of blindness causes me to feel less and less enthusiastic about so-called gun rights. You (and the NRA) should be part of the conversation, other than saying constantly saying "no, no and fuck no" whenever gun control measures are brought into the conversation.

    In any event, I believe there is a decent chance this strategy of yours and others like you will backfire (no pun intended) at some point in the future. We live in a democracy, and I believe that eventually the tide is going to turn on this issue because of things like the tragedy in Newtown. Eventually (and maybe the time is already here - seriously, the slaughter of 26 innocent people, of whom most were young children, will do that sort of thing), this could become such a hot button issue that more and more people will start voting for politicians who they believe will strike a better balance between society's need to minimize gun related violence and the right to possess and carry firearms, not to mention for presidents that will appoint Supreme Court justices that take a narrower view than Scalia and his pals on what the limits of the 2nd Amendment are. (I heard on the radio this morning about a poll that indicated 80% support for closing the gun show loophole, for example, yet politicians don't have the balls to accede to the will of the people on that issue.) It will appear to many that, while 26 families are going to endure the most hellish agony imaginable for the rest of their lives, you and others like you are more worried that your precious 2nd Amendment rights might be trod upon than how we might be motivated by this tragedy to take real steps to make it less likely that firearms (particularly ones capable of inflicting so much destruction in a short period of time) end up in the hands of madmen and criminals. May not be a fair conclusion but it's the sort of perception that will cause defections from the 2nd Amendment cause. The majority will have their way, at least partly, eventually. To paraphrase Noam Chomsky, we're free to live under these circumstances, but we're not required to.
  19. Jason Rolfe Wanderer

    Posts: 1,178
    the beach
    Ratings: +373 / 0
    Very, very well said, O mykiss.
  20. speyfisher Active Member

    Posts: 1,064
    State of Jefferson U.S.A.
    Ratings: +139 / 3
    1. I didn't say all video games should be banned & confiscated. Just the violent games involving killing people. And yes, why not because of the actions of a few? After all, that is no different than the logic of the left when it comes to guns.
    2. Video games are not protected by the constitution, guns are.
    3. We do not live in a democracy. We live in a republic. There is a big difference.
    4. What concessions has your side made? Why can you not "compromise" and give up a few video games that serve no useful purpose? Maybe we should have a buy back program on them. We'll give you 10% of what you paid for them and destroy them. Sounds to me like the same argument made about guns.
    Oh yeah, and by the way, we'll keep a file on everyone that had them. Just in case we need to go looking for anyone that may have held back a few, or might be a threat to society some day.
    Why should facts or logic enter into the discussion when it's aimed at you rather than me? Again, stupid video games. Like I should give a rats ass? The world got along fine before we had those things. It will survive without them. And I never used the "f" word. If your mind interpreted it that way,,,well.
    The shoe doesn't look so good when it's on the other foot, does it?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.