This is exactly is how I feel about the idea of arming teachers. We will ask them to teach our kids, call them incompetent when our kid is failing, be angry when they tell us our kid is suspended, but expect them to become the police in an instant. I don’t doubt for one minute there are teachers willing and able to do that. But I also don’t doubt for a minute that there are many who don’t want to, and some who are willing, but end up unable in the moment.

 

Exactly....It definitely should not be mandatory. Not every teacher will believe in it. But, I believe many of our teachers would be willing. As a last line of defense, I don't have a problem with it. Butler County, Ohio sheriff offered a free CCW class to any teacher and had over 250 teachers sign up in less than 24 hours. There is enough teachers in each school willing to do it. How they will react in a situation, no one will ever know until it happens.

The lack of a FBI type investigation is another statement of the problem. Local law enforcement agencies are in no position to address the larger issue of school shootings. Locals are one of those multi-facets that has to be involved but again this is just our Government dropping the ball on yet another level.

 

And mass murder is two words, please try again.

 

I did not know we were limited to one word to describe what happened.

 

The fact remains, according to the premier law enforcement agency responsible for investigating and preventing terrorism, school shootings and mass shootings are NOT terrorism just for the sake of it.

 

Dictionary.com doesn't really matter in the debate.

Dictionary.com doesn't really matter in the debate.

 

...mostly because their definition allows this incident to be interpreted as terrorism, and you don't agree.

I did not know we were limited to one word to describe what happened.

 

The fact remains, according to the premier law enforcement agency responsible for investigating and preventing terrorism, school shootings and mass shootings are NOT terrorism just for the sake of it.

 

Dictionary.com doesn't really matter in the debate.

 

It is a one word challenge I issued because no one word describes this incident better than Terrorism.

 

I think the more important fact that remains is when the Feds refuse to call this type of thing what it is, Terrorism, that relieves them of any responsibility to do anything about it.

 

So if I am counting the Feds claim they are not responsible, the SRO (at least in this case) refused to act, the mental health professionals (in another thread) state it isn't their cup of tea, local law enforcement doesn't have the resources to protect all the schools, most teachers say it isn't our area of expertise and what we are left with is a hot potato that no one wants to handle.

 

The end result will be more and more school shootings.

I think this SRO will end up being a scapegoat for those that ignored all the signs and tips. Honestly speaking, SRO’s are more often than not, either elderly retired cops or guys that couldn’t hack it in law enforcement but have that “certification”.

@theguru, do you recall when law enforcement seemed to start doing active shooter trainings? I’d say it’s really been in the last 10 years? Id be willing to bet this SRO had none to very little active shooter trainings. Truth be told, probably most of his career he was probably trained to post up and wait for another unit to arrive before making entry.

I think this SRO will end up being a scapegoat for those that ignored all the signs and tips. Honestly speaking, SRO’s are more often than not, either elderly retired cops or guys that couldn’t hack it in law enforcement but have that “certification”.

@theguru, do you recall when law enforcement seemed to start doing active shooter trainings? I’d say it’s really been in the last 10 years? Id be willing to bet this SRO had none to very little active shooter trainings. Truth be told, probably most of his career he was probably trained to post up and wait for another unit to arrive before making entry.

 

The whole SRO thing is mostly a joke in my opinion.

 

All too often SRO's end up being older guys collecting a second paycheck. Don't get me wrong everyone, most SRO's are absolutely fantastic people that are incredibly talented dealing with all kinds of human conditions but far too many them are NOT suited for active shooter situations.

 

Second, SRO's are Police Officers first but the culture inside most schools I know about really doesn't want the SRO being a Police Officer. The powers that be want the school handling everything. Or put another way, a lot of students are not charged with a lot of crimes they should be charged with for various reasons. Without getting into a long explanation I think the SRO Culture has blurred the lines about what what law enforcement is supposed to be about. The takeaway here for everyone is that a lot of incidents that should land a troubled young man (or woman) in the juvenile court system never see the light of day.

 

To your point about training, SRO's should have the most training and skills dealing with an active shooter but like you I bet they don't and I also bet the opposite is true in many cases just like you pointed out. Again, I don't know any of the details on the Florida incident but if the SRO wasn't trained properly to handle a situation like that then his best bet would be to take up a defensive position and try to access the situation. The takeaway here everyone is more often than not this is another systematic failure by our Government.

 

I remember the training well because the training was different than ALL the other law enforcement training I had. Generally speaking traditional law enforcement training is about the preservation of life. Active shooting training is designed to turn law enforcement officers in to calculated killers.

 

I use this example a lot with people, Police Officers are expected to go from Kitten to Killer in an instant, and then of course back to Kitten.

Keep classroom door locked after the class switch time. (This could also deter class tardiness because it won't be so easy to saunter in after the second bell. )

My students started a brainstorming discussions on what to do in my classroom. It was an interesting conversation.

Keep classroom door locked after the class switch time. (This could also deter class tardiness because it won't be so easy to saunter in after the second bell. )

My students started a brainstorming discussions on what to do in my classroom. It was an interesting conversation.

My classroom door has stayed closed and locked during class time for 22 years and counting, even when I was told not to.

I guess my school is lucky. Our school police officer is in his mid-30s, fit and vigilant. His presence in our building makes me and many of our staff and students feel safer. I'm very thankful for him!

All I can say is if that is the safest school in America...

 

...mostly because their definition allows this incident to be interpreted as terrorism, and you don't agree.

 

How so? Wouldn't you expect the law enforcement agency responsible for investigating terrorism to have a grasp on what it is?

It is a one word challenge I issued because no one word describes this incident better than Terrorism.

 

I think the more important fact that remains is when the Feds refuse to call this type of thing what it is, Terrorism, that relieves them of any responsibility to do anything about it.

 

So if I am counting the Feds claim they are not responsible, the SRO (at least in this case) refused to act, the mental health professionals (in another thread) state it isn't their cup of tea, local law enforcement doesn't have the resources to protect all the schools, most teachers say it isn't our area of expertise and what we are left with is a hot potato that no one wants to handle.

 

The end result will be more and more school shootings.

 

Tragic. Sad. Terrible. All those work in your made up challenge. Doesn't change the fact that it's not terrorism.

 

Call it what you want. Calling it terrorism won't change anything.

Tragic. Sad. Terrible. All those work in your made up challenge. Doesn't change the fact that it's not terrorism.

 

Call it what you want. Calling it terrorism won't change anything.

 

I will, I will call it Terrorism.

 

And it will make a difference because it will force the Federal Government to take ownership of the problem.

I will, I will call it Terrorism.

 

And it will make a difference because it will force the Federal Government to take ownership of the problem.

 

You have your opinion. I go by facts.

 

This does a decent job describing it. Without knowing this guy's motive, there's no way you can call it terrorism.

 

When are mass shootings acts of terrorism? – Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies – Medium

 

"Not defining an action as terrorism doesn’t mean that it is morally justified or acceptable. We should resist slipping into a kind of rhetoric in which terrorism is simply a term of opprobrium rather than a definition of a particular form of violence. There can be atrocious cruelty without terrorism."