Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Teachers carry guns

  1. Aug 15, 2008 #1
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 23, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 15, 2008 #2
    I wonder how long before an angry teacher shoots a student, or much more likely a teacher gets shot with his/her own gun by a student.
     
  4. Aug 15, 2008 #3

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I know enough teachers to know this is just a terrible idea, for the reasons WP stated.

    edit: and a third: the effect it will have on the classroom environment.
     
  5. Aug 15, 2008 #4

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Are they going to be trained?
    Will there be special shooting rages with the targets really close to the floor?

    It's pretty hard to take out more than a couple of kindergarteners, they tend to scatter - I would probably use a grenade.

    (ps, anyone who had nuns at school will see this as an improvement)
     
  6. Aug 15, 2008 #5

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    I think it is a good idea. The mass shootings that always turn out so tragically are the ones where only the nut is armed, the ones where someone else was armed always turn out much better.

    My PhD advisor had a corkboard where he had news clippings about students shooting professors. He was keeping score, which always made me nervous, but it was something like students: 13 to professors: 0 which always made me feel a little better :uhh:
     
  7. Aug 15, 2008 #6

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    No problem - if that happens we just arm the students as well.
    Of course it's difficult for a 5year old to hold a 44magnum, so first grade wil have to have some sort of tripod mounted - crew served weapon.
     
  8. Aug 15, 2008 #7
    I am amazed that one can even consider seriously such a horrible idea.

    FYI (and before people call me unaware of reality) I attended "priority high-school" where some students were actually carrying (illegally) handguns, trafficking (not necessarily light) drugs and such, and part of the staff was (unarmed) military. I personally was friend with more than one student who died in such violent context. That does not prevent me from thinking violence is not the right answer to violence. Cultural gaps I guess...
     
  9. Aug 15, 2008 #8

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    I doubt it.

    Wait until their liability insurance rates go up.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 23, 2017
  10. Aug 15, 2008 #9
    I think that's american way of dealing with problems :)
     
  11. Aug 15, 2008 #10
    I'm pretty sure school districts carry their own insurance.
     
  12. Aug 15, 2008 #11

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    This is ridiculous.

    A high school I attended for about a month until my parents could get me transfered out of district had so much gang violence that every entrance into the building had metal detectors and armed security guards. After passing through the detectors, you had to move sideways along the hallway (which was blocked so you could only shuffle sideways) with your back against the wall. This stopped killing with guns and most knives, brass knuckles, chains, etc... but didn't help the kid that was thrown out of a third story window. At lunch time police helicopters would circle the school. The Assistant Priciple had armed body guards due to the death threats against him.

    So, the way to prevent some nut from walking in with a weapon, is to stop him from walking in with a weapon.

    If teachers are allowed guns, by the time a teacher realizes what is happening and can figure out who is shooting, the teacher and most students will probably already be dead. Stupid idea.
     
  13. Aug 15, 2008 #12
    Until I see a "problem" with teachers shooting students, I'm going to say that it's good idea that teachers carry.

    What I DO see is students shooting students as well as teachers, that IS a problem. Teachers carrying will be a deterent for wackos thinking a gun-free zone is a plinking gallery.
     
  14. Aug 15, 2008 #13

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Unless the person intending to shoot announces their plans to shoot in order to allow anyone else with a gun time to draw, it will be too late. All of these crazy shooters went in intending to die, knowing someone else has a gun will be no deterent. And more innocent people could be killed in the crossfire.
     
  15. Aug 15, 2008 #14

    cristo

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    I concur wholeheartedly with Evo: what a terrible idea!
     
  16. Aug 15, 2008 #15
    Close, but I'd go a step further. I WOULD tell people my intentions right before I did it. Why? Suddenly you have several people with guns running around. The cops have no idea what's going on and who's the baddy. Lots of chaos and confusion and huge fallout over the whole debacle.
     
  17. Aug 15, 2008 #16
    You are basing your statement on a made up victim mentality scenario. "Teacher shouldn't have guns because if someone is going to shoot at you there is nothing you can do anyway". Now that is nonsense. Someone who is trained in the use of a firearm against a nut-case that is statistically not trained in the use of a firearm. What are you afraid of? I think the chances are better that a teacher could do something with a gun in that scenario than without one. That's just a plain statistical fact.
     
  18. Aug 15, 2008 #17
    I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens.
     
  19. Aug 15, 2008 #18

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Teacher has her back to the class writing on the blackboard. Shooter comes in and opens fire, teacher dead on the floor, students running and being shot.

    Teacher is in front of class lecturing, shooter comes in and starts friring, teacher is dead before she gets to her desk.

    Teacher is in the middle of the classroom talking to a student, shooter walks in and opens fire. Teacher never makes it back to their desk.

    Even if the teacher has the gun on them, chances are they will never get the opportunity to use it. And if they do, say if they weren't hit first (teachers are often the only one standing), by the time they realized what was happening, got the gun out, took off the safety, students would be running everywhere, the chances that they wouldn't hit a student in the confusion would be pretty low.

    Please explain how the gun helped the teacher. Do you think the teacher is going to walk around with a gun in their hand ready to shoot? :uhh:
     
  20. Aug 15, 2008 #19
    OK, this is easy, the teacher in the next room who is armed and trained for these circumstances, waits outside the room for an opportunity, the attacker is distracted/reloading/whatever, and kills the said attacker. The first teacher has died unfortunately, the second teacher saved lives by taking out the attacker before more are people are killed.

    As far the "cross-fire" idea, find me an article to where someone defending him/herself with a firearm has killed innocent bystanders. Then we will discuss that. When a gun goes off a persons first instinct is to hit the deck, get low, hide.
     
  21. Aug 15, 2008 #20
    I don't have a problem with someone owning a gun. However, keep in mind that accidents involving guns are much more likely than the use of a gun to defend one against a wacko -- that is the real statistical fact. Although the wackos get a lot of press whenever they go off the deep end, the actual number of attacks are very small. On the other hand, if you arm every one of the millions of teachers in America, the chances (even if they are only one in every 100,000 teachers) are that you are going to have many more kids being killed by teachers then ever were killed by wackos. It is a dumb idea.
     
  22. Aug 15, 2008 #21

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Agreed, but what I'm more worried about it kids getting ahold of the guns.
     
  23. Aug 15, 2008 #22

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    By the time another teacher gets a clue and gets to the room, either everyone's dead and the shooter kills the other teacher stupid enough to think they're just going to shoot the gunman. That is if the shooter is even still there by that time.

    You've got to be joking. You're claiming that you haven't read articles where the person with the gun trying to defend themselves accidently shot themselves with their own gun? And you expect that someone that has never been in that situation won't hit someone accidently in a small room filled with panicked people?

    You haven't actually been in a situation where someone opened fire and someone was killed, have you? I have. I witnessed a murder where a man was killed. It doesn't happen like that. You hear a loud noise, like a car has backfired, or a firecracker, you don't know, your mind is trying to make sense of it. You see someone stagger and fall to the ground, you think "wow, he must be loaded", but funny he seemed sober a minute ago. You walk over to where the person is lying on the ground and see some dark liquid coming out from under him. What the heck is that, you wonder?
     
  24. Aug 15, 2008 #23
    No, Evo, please finde me an article.

    Yes, Evo, a shootout right in front of my house. The blood from one of the bodies flowed half a block down the street. Myself and everyone in the house hit the freakin deck looking for cover.

    Enough with the drama. To have people trained in the proper use of a firearm protecting themselves and those around them is a good thing. More people are killed intentionally by guns than accidentally.
     
  25. Aug 15, 2008 #24

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    How about thousands? http://www.google.com/search?source...rlz=1T4HPIA_en___US243&q=accidental+shootings

    Did you live in a bad neighborhood where the possibility of someone having a gun was not unusual? I can tell you that in my neighborhood no gun has ever been fired and people would have no idea what the noise was.

    Since handguns are made for the purpose of shooting people, I would expect so.
     
  26. Aug 15, 2008 #25
    This wouldn't solve the problem. They need to know what's causing the problem.

    Instead of putting money into developing weapons if they use it for society development or children welfare programs, there wouldn't be any gun shootings.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook