I know AED's inside out. Paramedic for 20 plus years does that.

 

You keep saying you are not against guns for trained personnel at school. Who should be trained in your opinion?

 

I never said you didn't know AED's inside and out. My comment on their use wasn't meant to "teach you" about AED's, it was meant to support my comment that AED's and guns are not similar devices and aren't really comparable to each other. FWIW, I've also been trained in the use of AED's as a requirement for my paid coaching positions (which I have been retrained every two years for the last 10 years), and have actually used one in real life. I'm not on your level, but I'm not a greenhorn either.

 

I don't have an answer as to who should be trained. Maybe anyone who wants to? But again, I'm not a fan of making it a requirement of the job. Not everyone is capable of handling firearms, and teachers are no different.

I wouldn't say there has been a myriad of suggestions. Pretty much force teachers to train and arm them, and only be able to use them under an active shooter situation (although how to manage that wasn't part of the solution).

 

One, I wouldn't want to require all teachers/personal be forced to train and have to use a gun as part of the job or a condition of employment. If you don't want to, or feel you're not qualified to use a gun, you shouldn't have to. You'd seriously cut down on the already dwindling number of people who want to teach. I'd have to see quality, consistent and ongoing training, not showing up at a range type stuff. Which means you'd have to partner with Law enforcement (which will have a cost). I'd need to be assured that the guns could only be accessed by teachers, and only under certain situations. And that, I'm not sure how you would accomplish, because a handbook and rules won't prevent it. Sure it would mean somebody could get fired, but at that point it would be too late.

 

I just don't think it's as simple as saying "train 'em and arm 'em"

 

I think it is much less difficult than you are trying to make it.

 

It can be as simple as "train 'em and arm 'em". You train them. Have them qualify. Have them qualify at least 4 times per year. Like FTN said, you put them in a safe that alarms when opened. Safe is only to be accessed in an active shooter situation.

 

I am a firm believer in having it and not needing it than needing it and not having it.

 

And common sense dictates that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

It's already happening.

I think it is much less difficult than you are trying to make it.

 

It can be as simple as "train 'em and arm 'em". You train them. Have them qualify. Have them qualify at least 4 times per year. Like FTN said, you put them in a safe that alarms when opened. Safe is only to be accessed in an active shooter situation.

 

I am a firm believer in having it and not needing it than needing it and not having it.

 

And common sense dictates that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

 

So how far does it go?? A gun/safe in each room?? All teachers have to qualify, and train in active shooter situations? Do teachers have to pay for their own training?

So how far does it go?? A gun/safe in each room?? All teachers have to qualify, and train in active shooter situations? Do teachers have to pay for their own training?

 

No, not all teachers. I'm sure you will have many that would volunteer.

 

School system pays for the weapons, ammo and training/qualification.

There's always home schooling my liberal friends.

Ive said this before, but there is a simple solution to safer schools. Make military personal on their way out, have to be an armed aid in schools. Each school would have to have at least 2. They can carry their weapons concealed. This not only provides safety, but allows for a good transition for military personal into real world dynamics.

I like how Trump isn't even waiting a day to contradict himself anymore, now he is just waiting for the next comma.

 

Teachers with guns? No! Unless they have a descent background in firearms and still I'm not sure. But as I have said many times, how about in every school in the country we place at least one or two people who just got done serving in the military? This would be a nice start.

Ive said this before' date=' but there is a simple solution to safer schools. Make military personal on their way out, have to be an armed aid in schools. Each school would have to have at least 2. They can carry their weapons concealed. This not only provides safety, but allows for a good transition for military personal into real world dynamics.[/quote']

 

It's not the people it's the guns that liberals are afraid of. You could put Chris Kyle at the door and they would still play the 1% if he snaps card.

There is no plan here. Just a statement that we need guns in schools, or as T-Rump says "maybe, if teachers wants them."

It's not the people it's the guns that liberals are afraid of. You could put Chris Kyle at the door and they would still play the 1% if he snaps card.

 

For me not at all. The gun requires someone to fire it.

How is acknowledging the possibility of a teacher using one of these guns in the wrong way illogical?

 

I just think teachers should be worried about teaching, I think that having other people on the grounds of all schools would be more suited to protect the schools.

Ive said this before, but there is a simple solution to safer schools. Make military personal on their way out, have to be an armed aid in schools. Each school would have to have at least 2. They can carry their weapons concealed. This not only provides safety, but allows for a good transition for military personal into real world dynamics.

 

Not a bad idea.

Not every teacher would be armed. First would be those who volunteer. Those who volunteer would have to pass a psychological test, then pass a firearms test to be allowed to be armed in a school.

It's not the people it's the guns that liberals are afraid of. You could put Chris Kyle at the door and they would still play the 1% if he snaps card.

 

Umm I don't think the idea of Chris Kyle is going to help your argument.