That is because the expectations have changed.

 

In the past you needed an experienced officer to handle all the internal politics and ethical issues that are not tolerated in most police departments.

 

Now we need aggressive killers.

 

Or maybe officers young enough to relate to the students.

One officer, two officers, a dozen officers, do no good if you let the weapons walk right in the front door.

You put enough officers in there and the cowards won't even try to bring in a gun. That said I agree with your point. Armed guards are just a piece.

One officer, two officers, a dozen officers, do no good if you let the weapons walk right in the front door.

No good? Then how did the incident today end if they do no good?

In all the meetings I have had with law enforcement recently, there is only one trained SRO in the sheriff's and city departments combined. They believe it won't be long until all will be required to be trained. Our district is now working with law enforcement to put sub stations outside on our campuses to serve the schools on those campuses, which the district will build with community companies with materials and labor.

 

All three forces (sheriff, city and state police) have agreed to have officers man them at times. Although not an total solution, it becomes another deterrent. This will be our best solution until we can find funding for SRO's (difficult in these state budget times) and they can get several trained. Then we can use both an SRO and the substation.

 

It takes a certain type of officer to work within a school, thus the training. There are a lot of tools being introduced to schools right now. It is a grueling process trying to vet what will work and what is just junk and some company trying to make a quick buck. This is time consuming, but necessary.

 

Law enforcement and the district have discussed having certain staff with guns, if it were allowable, which it isn't now. I cannot find one law officer that thinks this is a good idea. Their main reasoning is the time and cost of training alone is extensive and not many that even think they would be good, really are not. My eyes were opened (in a positive way) in the annual training on guns the officers get. I had no idea and I would bet most wouldn't. I assumed they did, but not as extensive as they explained.

 

Teachers would never get to teach if they had to have this training, which they should. Ths why I elieve SRO's are the way to go.

In all the meetings I have had with law enforcement recently, there is only one trained SRO in the sheriff's and city departments combined. They believe it won't be long until all will be required to be trained. Our district is now working with law enforcement to put sub stations outside on our campuses to serve the schools on those campuses, which the district will build with community companies with materials and labor.

 

All three forces (sheriff, city and state police) have agreed to have officers man them at times. Although not an total solution, it becomes another deterrent. This will be our best solution until we can find funding for SRO's (difficult in these state budget times) and they can get several trained. Then we can use both an SRO and the substation.

 

It takes a certain type of officer to work within a school, thus the training. There are a lot of tools being introduced to schools right now. It is a grueling process trying to vet what will work and what is just junk and some company trying to make a quick buck. This is time consuming, but necessary.

 

Law enforcement and the district have discussed having certain staff with guns, if it were allowable, which it isn't now. I cannot find one law officer that thinks this is a good idea. Their main reasoning is the time and cost of training alone is extensive and not many that even think they would be good, really are not. My eyes were opened (in a positive way) in the annual training on guns the officers get. I had no idea and I would bet most wouldn't. I assumed they did, but not as extensive as they explained.

 

Teachers would never get to teach if they had to have this training, which they should. Ths why I elieve SRO's are the way to go.

 

I can find a whole bunch that think it is a good idea if we are serious about solutions.

 

And remember they have a conflict of interest, more SRO positions means more cushy retirement like jobs for law enforcement officers, more voters if the SROs are Deputies, and doing and saying what your superiors tell you because law enforcement is a know your role and shut your mouth occupation. In other words, if the powers that be say they want more SROs and not teachers with guns then the foot soldiers will tell guys like you teachers with guns are not a good idea.

No good? Then how did the incident today end if they do no good?

 

He eliminated a threat that should have never gotten into the building. The entire event could have been avoided all together.

He eliminated a threat that should have never gotten into the building. The entire event could have been avoided all together.

 

 

That is so uninformed and naive.

He eliminated a threat that should have never gotten into the building. The entire event could have been avoided all together.

First, the officer did tons of good. There are kids (and likely adults) alive because of him.

 

Second, metal detectors don't eliminate the threat. They simply reduce it. There will always be shootings because there will always be guns.

I can find a whole bunch that think it is a good idea if we are serious about solutions.

 

And remember they have a conflict of interest, more SRO positions means more cushy retirement like jobs for law enforcement officers, more voters if the SROs are Deputies, and doing and saying what your superiors tell you because law enforcement is a know your role and shut your mouth occupation. In other words, if the powers that be say they want more SROs and not teachers with guns then the foot soldiers will tell guys like you teachers with guns are not a good idea.

 

Until you have beeen in my conversations, I am not sure anyone really knows. I have no reason to believe that they want cushy jobs. I think that is a slap in the face of the majority of lw enforcement. I truly believe they have very different mindsets about this now. They did not push anything. They were answering my questions. We had honest sincere conversations. No politics involved in my thinking and eventual implementation. 2800 kids are not going to be my or anyone elses political leaning in our final decisions. I left my feelings at the door. I asked everything whether I thought it was a good idea or not.

Until you have beeen in my conversations, I am not sure anyone really knows. I have no reason to believe that they want cushy jobs. I think that is a slap in the face of the majority of lw enforcement. I truly believe they have very different mindsets about this now. They did not push anything. They were answering my questions. We had honest sincere conversations. No politics involved in my thinking and eventual implementation. 2800 kids are not going to be my or anyone elses political leaning in our final decisions. I left my feelings at the door. I asked everything whether I thought it was a good idea or not.

 

In short, law enforcement officers WANT more good guys and gals with guns that are trained and willing to step up in an emergency.

 

If anyone in law enforcement ever tells you any different they are lying to you.

That is so uninformed and naive.

 

Answer me this, why do I have to get half naked to get on a plane, but I can walking directly into a school and not even show an ID?

First, the officer did tons of good. There are kids (and likely adults) alive because of him.

 

Second, metal detectors don't eliminate the threat. They simply reduce it. There will always be shootings because there will always be guns.

 

There are also individuals who were injury physically and many more emotionally, because the school district failed to do a basic thing to prevent the event from happening.

 

Also the guns dont shoot anyone randomly, someone has to pull the trigger.

Answer me this, why do I have to get half naked to get on a plane, but I can walking directly into a school and not even show an ID?

 

Because the Federal Government took ownership to stop that type of terrorism after 911 but in the case of schools the Federal Government is not taking ownership of the problem therefore we are left with a million different localities trying to come up with a piecemeal plan.

Because the Federal Government took ownership to stop that type of terrorism after 911 but in the case of schools the Federal Government is not taking ownership of the problem therefore we are left with a million different localities trying to come up with a piecemeal plan.

 

Correct, I have to go through 2 sets of metal detectors to renew my drivers licence, but yet I can walk into a school with as much as I can carry weapon wise and no one notices a thing. How stupid is that.

 

As I have said before, no one really cares about a child's life, a teachers life, an body in the schools life. If they did, the simplest first line of defence would have been in place decades ago.

I am eager to hear more of this story. On the surface this seems to be a crime of passion—for the lack of a better term— rather than an attempt at mass murder.

 

I saw a story on TV the other day where Knox County installed metal detectors in all the schools, and were looking for secured funding for SROs. They were already a no backpack school.

 

Now that’s being proactive.