<p>"HARROLD, Texas (AP) – A tiny Texas school district will allow teachers and staff members to carry concealed firearms to protect against school shootings, provided the gun-toting employees follow certain requirements.</p>
<p>The small community of Harrold in north Texas is a 30-minute drive from the Wilbarger County Sheriff’s Office, leaving students and teachers without protection, said David Thweatt, superintendent of the Harrold Independent School District. The lone campus of the 110-student district sits near a heavily traveled highway, which could make it a target, he argued.</p>
<p>“When the federal government started making schools gun-free zones, that’s when all of these shootings started. Why would you put it out there that a group of people can’t defend themselves? That’s like saying 'sic ‘em’ to a dog,” Thweatt said in a story published Friday on the Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s Web site.</p>
<p>Barbara Williams, a spokeswoman for the Texas Association of School Boards, said her organization did not know of another district with such a policy. …"</p>
<p>Ummmm… the only school that I know that was targeted by an outsider was the Amish school. All the other school shootings were perpetrated by INSIDERS - people within the school. </p>
<p>If the school is that far from the only law enforcement in the area, perhaps it should be authorized to have one or two guns in a specific locked location in the school (known to the principal and one or two others). But to allow teachers and staff to roam the halls with concealed weapons… yikes.</p>
<p>In addition to the obvious concerns, one thing that scares me is that there have been far more cases reported of teachers sexually taking advantage of students than there have been school shootings. Hard as it is for students to report molestations and sexual passes made by school staff members, I’m sure it would be even harder to report if those staff members were armed.</p>
<p>Also, I wonder if teachers would be kicked out of school for threatening kids? Like instead of threatening rowdy elementary with timeout teachers threaten to blow their brains out.</p>
<p>Wow. What a way to set an example about gun control, just let the teachers walk around with them. I feel like if we want to set an example of non-violence to children, carrying guns around an academic institution where children should feel safe doesn’t sound like a logical rout.
Considering most school shootings happen due to a student feeling singled out and threatened for one reason or another, maybe Texas should install greater diversity programs and student counseling so that cases that could be potentially dangerous don’t turn out deadly but are taken care of.</p>
<p>Just a political message. Honestly, in rural Texas, I’m SURE that the students the teachers, or anyone else wishing to shoot the school would have very easy access to guns even if they were not allowed on school grounds (this doesn’t impact buying or licensing, does it?). Will it make any real difference? Probably not.</p>
<p>Let’s see - some raving lunatic bursts into a classroom shooting wildly. Teacher then says, “Wait a minute while I get my gun out of the locked cabinet where I have it secured” (assuming, of course, that teacher keeps his/her gun kept secure where students can’t get it). Or will teachers be wearing holsters?</p>
<p>Well, my understanding is that classrooms will be modified for teachers’ cars, so you know, they can just grab their piece from the glove compartment.</p>
<p>But it may also encourage children to feel safe around trusted people with guns. Better for armed citizens to outnumber baddies than to have citizens no guns and the baddies all of them.</p>
<p>Growing up, nearly everyone had guns. Gun safety was taught from a very early age, six or seven if I recall correctly. By ten I was fully disassembling rifles to clean them. And to the best of my knowledge no one every had an UNLOADED gun pointed at them, never mind a loaded one. School disagreements were settled with fists, usually off school grounds. And yes, unbalanced youths were kept separated from the rest of the school population.</p>
<p>Skip forward twenty years and many policy changes later, and a girl walking down the hallway of my suburban high school was stabbed to death by an unbalanced student who didn’t even know her. </p>
<p>As much as I find the Harrold TX “gun tot’n” policy repugnant, I can understand the frustration of being responsible for student safety but not having authority to make policy on the issue.</p>
<p>If you look at the situation, it makes sense. Concealed carry permit holders are very law-abiding individuals. They have a crime rate of 5 times less than the average citizen (also less than NYPD officers). Beyond the normal requirements for CCW permits, the school district is using its own screening, requiring training in crisis management, and requiring frangible ammunition. That is a lot of checks on their own system.</p>
<p>The school estimates a law enforcement response time of over 30minutes. Being a very small district, it would likely be a large financial burden to hire armed security. Texas already allows some individuals to carry firearms, so why not take advantage of the possibilities and use the employees they already have? That way, they get an immediate response to danger and do not have to spend large amounts of money hiring personnel who don’t teach or do any administrative work.</p>
<p>“Texas already allows some individuals to carry firearms, so why not take advantage of the possibilities and use the employees they already have?”</p>
<p>Because, as noted above, some of those employees are likely to pose a real danger to students.</p>
<p>Great, now teachers’ unions will probably request another 3-4 days a year “vacation/working” for shooting practice, or organize an annual January championship/conference in Hawaii.</p>
<p>“likely” under what standard, mini? Texas CCW holders (even those without the additional screening and training required by the district) are less likely to commit a crime than an NYPD police officer, and are over 5 times less likely to commit a crime than the average citizen.</p>
<p>Sources (courtesy of SCCCs records):
A comparison of statistics on arrests of police officers, published by the Washington Post on 08/28/94, to
Florida Department of Law Enforcement statistics submitted to the Governor on 03/15/95.</p>
<p>A four year study by engineering statistician William E. Sturdevant found that Texas concealed
handgun license holders were 5.5 times less likely than non-license holders to be convicted of
violent crimes. According to statistics from the Texas Department of Public Safety and the
U.S. Census Bureau, reported by the San Antonio Express-News in September 2000, Texas
concealed handgun license holders were 14 times less likely than the non-license holders to
commit a crime of any kind and five times less likely to commit a violent crime.</p>
<p>Yea, sure mini. Given the fact that there are CC thats allowed by policy by a bunch of colleges in Utah, along with Colorado state, etc, (no incidents whatsoever in any of those colleges, by the way). its a real danger. Gun free school zones are the biggest threats to students. There is a difference between real threats and make believe hysteria. CC and LTCF holders are much less likely to be involved in crimes. </p>
<p>I’m SCCC leader for our campus. Under PA law its not illegal to carry on campus, just against campus policy. K-12 is still illegal generally, but there are some provisions under the law that might pass under a gun friendly judge.</p>
<p>p.s. what does this have to do with sex abuse? they are allowing ccw by teachers, not handing out ky jelly and bondage gear…</p>
<p>““likely” under what standard, mini? Texas CCW holders (even those without the additional screening and training required by the district) are less likely to commit a crime than an NYPD police officer, and are over 5 times less likely to commit a crime than the average citizen.”</p>
<p>I’ve already posted the data.</p>
<p>p.s. what does this have to do with sex abuse?</p>
<p>I presume you understand the term “forcible”? Sex abuse is a CRIME, and every crime has a CRIMINAL.</p>