The issue of cost hasn't come up I don't think.

How much will the training cost? How much will the guns cost? I want an Uzi. In fact I want one G-36 for each hand. How much will they cost? How about ammo?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Oh, BTW---where will this money come from if we don't have money in the budget for pencils and paper right now?

---

If we get assault rifles and top shelf com equipment, I'm a lot more likely to not run and hide! I'll be first at the training drills! Once/month! Extra pay, I hope.

---

I think in every school shooting incident at least one teacher or adult staff has stood in front of the children and sacrificed their lives to protect our children as if they are their own. I believe most teachers wouldn't be in their job if they didn't care for the children in their care. Thank you very much to all teachers.

If you remove all the political bullshit, I believe most teachers would die to protect the children in their care. Allow them the tools and give them the training and support they need to feel confident when confronted with one of these unthinkable situations that they can make this hard choice and know that as a community we are their for them and thankful that they are there for our children.

My 2 cents!

I think Yanman's take on this is the best yet.Even though I said..'they should be armed'.I don't necessarily believe that wholeheartedly now.LOTS can go wrong arming teachers....perhaps a FEW inside,fully willing and trained.But that's about it.As for security...yes...I think more should be done there.

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 3/16/2018 @ 12:19 AM *

Although I am against guns at any level, the United States is a completely different scenario to Australia and New Zealand so how about this for a potential idea?

There are under cover armed personnel on certain passenger carrying airliners.
The deterrent is no one knows what flights these trained security people are on or at what frequency.
But these security people are all volenteers and choose to do this.
This has seemed to have worked quite well.

How about something similar in schools where there is a drive to recruit only willing teachers, janitors, etc who agree to carry weapons covertly with associated training in the classroom and on school grounds, but done in a non disclosed way so no one actually knows who they are and at what schools.
As with the under cover airliner security guards, perhaps this may help to force potential school shooters to think twice because they wouldn't know at what schools there would be resistance and protection and from whom with in that school.

And it would not force teachers who did not wish to be part of the program to participate...

---

Yeah...I think so.

I don't think any teachers are gonna be forced to participate though.Only the willing.

yannih, you switched your comparison example from apples to oranges. In your original statement which I referenced...

yannih: If teachers are to carry loaded firearms in the classroom can you 100% rule out any accidental injury or deaths?
Everytime?

....you are asking for a 100% guarantee of a result, an outcome.

But in your example you are referencing a decision, commitment to 100% participate, regardless of the outcome, results....

yannih: If we lose our lives riding we knew what was involved and it's always 100% our call to ride or not.

.....despite your 100% commitment to ride (decision), you nor anyone else can 100% guarantee (everytime) what the results and outcome of riding will be, yet you are willing to run the risk. My point is, regardless of your commitment to do something and preparation for that something, you can not 100% guarantee the outcome, even for something we all do, like go to sleep. Yet there are those who will not wake up.

yannih:As a basic example what if I all of a sudden forced a rule on you that stated you can only ride your motorcycle if you carry a fire extinguisher with you at all times and you must stop at every fire outbreak you see and assist in putting out that fire regardless of the situation, danger presented or your experience? I, an outsider have now made a decision and put a limitation on what you love and have made it less desirable and more dangerous.
Do I have the right to tell you, someone who loves riding motorbikes that you should also be a firefighter, trained or not?

I never said to force a rule on any one. In fact I have made it very clear there are some teachers who would not pass the selection process, nor have I stated every teacher must carry a gun. But if you did force this motorcycle rule, it would be my decision to ride, not yours. And, actually I probably would ride and I would assist my best to extinguish fires.

yannih: Why? They are teachers for god sake! Some will have it in them to do that and some will not. If they wanted to carry guns or protect the community they would have joined the police force or army. Again, they are just teachers. Get guards/security/personnel that are specifically trained for that purpose. Add security to schools but let teachers teach...

Again, I have never said they must all carry guns. But, before they are teachers, they are adults. For those teachers who are prepared (and do, and have) to take the responsibility to stand and do the best they can to protect their students regardless of carrying a gun, I salute them. They realize there may come a day in the classroom, as on the street, they may face adversity in the form of a lethal threat and have made a commitment to address the threat by best means possible. That may mean a withdraw, it may mean a counter-attack, it may mean a barricade. Their mindset to fulfill their adult responsibility does not interfere with their ability to teach, rather it compliments it.

yannih:Jeez Eagle. What if you lived in a street you loved all your life and I came up to you and suddenly said "Whether you like it or not from today you are now solely responsible to protect everyone in this street. It's now part of the condition of you living here. Carry a firearm or don't, but it's up to you to ensure the streets safety. I don't really care if it's in your makeup to be a protector or not. If you don't like it you are not really welcome here and should consider leaving and living somewhere else?"
Does that all sound fair and reasonable to you?

You are not comparing apples and oranges. Students are for the most part forced to attend school. They are under the supervision and leadership of the school administrators, staffing, and assigned teachers. They are of the age we consider they need protecting from aggressive adults. For the most part, the assigned teacher has taken the role of the students parents to guide and protect while in their care.

In my neighborhood there are families, parents and their children. As a parent I am responsible for my children and they are responsible for theirs. If however, they need/want my help, even to the point of lethal force, and the authorities are not available, I will do my best. If a condition of them living here was that they live under my roof and by my rules, then yes, I would be responsible for them all, but that is not the condition, neither is it with any other free neighborhood.

yannih:Very admirable Eagle. And I definitely am not doubting or challenging that you would act as required.
But firstly have you been in a situation like we are discussing here to find out what you are really made of because we learn a lot about ourselves when challenged under severe pressure? We would all like to think we would be the hero of the day if the time came, but there is every chance we end up shaking under a table and trying to protect our own skins.
And secondly you are making a huge assumption with this statement because you are assuming everyone is like you which they are not. You have advised that you would definitely stand up to be counted and save lives and the day if the time came. But not everyone has that in them and they openly and honestly admit that potential short coming up front.
By the way, history has shown many times that the big talking heroes are no where to be found when needed and the self professed doubters of their own abilities step up and somehow get the job done.

Very good point you made which I have made previously, we don't know until we know. I don't think my resume is that important to the discussion, but as your question seems to point towards me, I'm a former NCO infantry combat veteran. They have shot at me and missed, I have shot at them and hit. I have been in law enforcement. I have graduated over 2,000 students from the Arizona Concealed Weapon Permit Gun Safety Course. I have trained many more than that including law enforcement, military, personal protection and citizen civilians in basic firearm safety up through SWAT/SPL OPS level tactical lethal force, which is only 20% guns and 80% mind conditioning and wisdom. I have seen and experienced the dark side of crime and war, as well as, the light side, first hand. Since my late teens I have made a commitment to stand in the face of a threat. I would never forecast how well I will do when the moment of lethal adversity knocks on my door, but I can say I will do my best to protect myself and others at the time, as I have done in the past. I'm not anyone special, many have taken a stand to fight when under attack (including teachers!), it's just the notion that teachers don not have a responsibility for their students while in their care that disturbs me, both from parents and from some teachers.

As a teacher/instructor I think I have a pretty good idea of what it takes to provide others, who need it, to develop the mindset to prevail under stressful attack. Some don't need it, others will never get it, the rest (majority) can develop it, if they want to. None of us are perfect, and we cannot 100% guarantee an outcome. What we can do is prepare and and when challenged, try by doing the best we can. The notion that teachers are "just teacher" massively undercuts their value and insults the profession.

* Last updated by: EagleSix on 3/16/2018 @ 10:59 AM *

---

yannih:There are under cover armed personnel on certain passenger carrying airliners.
The deterrent is no one knows what flights these trained security people are on or at what frequency.
But these security people are all volenteers and choose to do this.
This has seemed to have worked quite well.

How about something similar in schools where there is a drive to recruit only willing teachers, janitors, etc who agree to carry weapons covertly with associated training in the classroom and on school grounds, but done in a non disclosed way so no one actually knows who they are and at what schools.
As with the under cover airliner security guards, perhaps this may help to force potential school shooters to think twice because they wouldn't know at what schools there would be resistance and protection and from whom with in that school.

This is an idea as a layer of protection. There are a few schools that have used undercover officer, although from what I understand this is usually on a part time basis. And I have always implied that teachers, staff, etc. be on a volunteer basis. So I think we agree on this. As a retired teacher/instructor in the field of lethal force it is my concern that we attain a level of training and vetting process, that will provide a reasonable level of safety while arming those on school grounds and provide them with the tools to secure firearms from inadvertent incidents, not just put them in a roll of being a commando, if challenged.

There are those that this layer of security will not deter. But, it would present a deterrent to some and some is better than none, which is the principle of multilevel security. The more levels and layers in the way, the more incidents can be avoided. A question is, how many layers and types of layers are we willing to enact and endure? Also, as I think Rook brought up, there is also the issue of cost and cost effectiveness. How much money are we willing to spend and on what layers?

There are many who feel an armed and unformed officer will provide a better deterrent because they can be seen by a possible intruder, which I agree with in part. The second edge of this sword however is that they can be seen! We know that most criminals aren't that smart, but some are very slick and can observe when that uniform is not present. The opposite edge to this, is as you suggest, the unseen and unknown layer of the person undercover. Although keeping a secrete as to who is an undercover person is extremely difficult to keep secrete for long periods of time, but it can be done for reasonable time lengths and that may be enough.

---

Thank you for your service to this great country.

+1 Thank you, EagleSix.

For those teachers who are prepared (and do, and have) to take the responsibility to stand and do the best they can to protect their students regardless of carrying a gun, I salute them. They realize there may come a day in the classroom, as on the street, they may face adversity in the form of a lethal threat and have made a commitment to address the threat by best means possible.

This is the same for any citizen who lawfully carries a concealed weapon in public. I reiterate, the vast majority of teachers will never suffer a crisis like this just like the vast majority of people in general will never be a victim of a terrorist attack in or outside of a school. It's all the media attention these things (rightfully) get that alarms us. I see it as each adult being prepared for ANY kind of attack to whatever degree they choose to be appropriate. It's not likely enough to happen to put a lot more energy into solving such a small threat.

It does bring up the question of the ethics of parents of children in the care of other adults protecting those children with guns. If you are not in favor of civilians carrying military weapons, would it be ok if some other adult civilian used a military weapon to defend your kid?

---

I want Eagle Six on my side ....

I would think any teacher that goes thru the process to carry with additional training to carry on the job would stand up and defend the kids. All the women I know who support gun rights would shoot first and ask questions later, the guy would be the ones second guessing the situations.

What a nasty discussion is coming on the parents who want the teacher armed to protect their kid but the teacher is against it and wont and the parents who dont want the teacher to carry and their kid is in CCW teacher classroom, what a mess and all the while the kids are still in gun free zones and the nutjobs know it.

---

Thank You bumpfire, Rook, and cruderudy.

Rook: This is the same for any citizen who lawfully carries a concealed weapon in public. I reiterate, the vast majority of teachers will never suffer a crisis like this just like the vast majority of people in general will never be a victim of a terrorist attack in or outside of a school. It's all the media attention these things (rightfully) get that alarms us. I see it as each adult being prepared for ANY kind of attack to whatever degree they choose to be appropriate. It's not likely enough to happen to put a lot more energy into solving such a small threat.

I agree....

cruderudy: I would think any teacher that goes thru the process to carry with additional training to carry on the job would stand up and defend the kids. All the women I know who support gun rights would shoot first and ask questions later, the guy would be the ones second guessing the situations.

This statement has a whole lot of truth in it!

---

There was a rumor of a bomb threat at the high school in my town. Another story about a gun attack threat made at another school in a not too distant town. I'm attributing it to all of the media attention the actual events cause. I wonder if the students who actually carry these attacks out aren't partially compelled by how effective political terrorist attacks are at causing fear and gaining attention. That is an awful lot of power for someone who feels they have no hope.

---

Rook: ~~~ I'm attributing it to all of the media attention the actual events cause. I wonder if the students who actually carry these attacks out aren't partially compelled by how effective political terrorist attacks are at causing fear and gaining attention. That is an awful lot of power for someone who feels they have no hope.

I think this is a good point and agree. The hype in the news media and social media has the potential to fan the flames and/or create the flames in those youths who are prone to act out, yet lack the maturity to realize the consequences of their actions. Ironically a lot of this hype is presented by adults who follow the "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality in the news. The news doesn't provide the balance or restraints I would like to see/hear.

* Last updated by: EagleSix on 3/17/2018 @ 12:11 PM *

---

ban guns,only criminals will have em...true story

Yes, I knew it would be a very short time for the pro gun lobbyists to have orgasm after orgasm regarding their firearms point of view on this very very sad day for New Zealand.

The blood is not dry on the ground and I'm already reading stuff like this.

Bump, I agree that where there is a will there is a way, but have you considered this is the first mass shooting in New Zealand's history where guns are regulated when your country has them more times than I've had hot dinners where guns are not?

New Zealand's mass shooting tally now sits at 49 from what I last heard.
You tell me what the number for the United States of America stands at?

* Last updated by: yannih on 3/15/2019 @ 12:29 PM *

---

we live in a world where 'force' is necessary at times.It would be awesome if everyone was sane and good.But they're not.Guns save many lives everyday.Tragic that crazies get guns.Or bombs,or whatever.Hateful people will always be here.One can only live right and do right.A person can't regulate sanity of others.

Guns save many lives everyday.

Unbelievable.

Remind me what the primary design purpose for any gun or fire arm is again?

It doesn't matter.

I don't believe in God because in the history of mankind there is not one single sliver of proof, evidence or reason to back the concept.
To me its an absolute mystery why but I will never be able to convince a believer otherwise.

I don't believe in guns because in my opinion so many lives would have been saved if they were less prevalent in society.
But again I will never convince someone who is die hard pro firearms of this.

Thats life.
We move on with our individual beliefs.

All I'm saying is out of respect for those who have been murdered and slain just wait a little while before you start spraying your opinions around on the matter.

* Last updated by: yannih on 3/15/2019 @ 3:25 PM *

---

Radicals do horrific things to innocents in the name of their religion and beliefs over and over.
I despise it to such an extent that I often wished to myself that innocent's who believe in the same ideology got some of the same medicine back so they and theirs might understand what it's like.
I know am not alone with those thoughts.

But now that very thing has happened on my own doorstep, I know it is not the answer.

Extreme radicals don't blink at cutting off an innocent human beings head or burning someone alive in a cage.
In fact they actually enjoy it.
But when something like the Christchurch mass shooting happens where some might say its just deserved payback, most sane minded people feel sick, sorry, empathy, sadness, and regret rather than some kind of satisfaction.

It is why defeating these radicals with extreme beliefs is an almost impossible task.
They will do anything for their belief, and at the same time enjoy it.
But we will not.

Just my point of view.

* Last updated by: yannih on 3/16/2019 @ 3:46 AM *

---

"Remind me what the primary design purpose for any gun or fire arm is again?"..to stay alive when food was hard to catch.Still used for this today.There are some who live off the things they can catch.All over the world.Hard to believe I know.But VERY true.Now if you need home protection,then there's that.Which guns have always been used for.

I today's world,carry and conceal is definitely a viable consideration.Lots of crazy people running around.Which really isn't much different than it's always been.

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 3/16/2019 @ 11:14 AM *

Green, how dark is it with your head that far down in the sand?

You know the answer.
But for obvious reasons you just won't say it.

Guns were solely designed to kill.

Make of it or interpret that statement any way you like but it is a simple fact...

---

Flipped channels and landed on the golf tournament The Players Championship, and inside the ropes is a security guard with a gun on his hip, very clearly seen on TV.

Somebody thinks he needs it.

---

"Guns were solely designed to kill"..well,for a guy having my head in the sand...I think I said this?lol.Maybe re-read my post?And as far as 'intruders'...well,yeah.Especially if they mean to harm you and yours.As for God...you needn't worry about that.He believes in you;)

* Last updated by: Grn14 on 3/16/2019 @ 4:30 PM *

Are you taking the piss?

The simple question was "What is the primary design purpose for any gun or firearm?", and you bring up Olympic shooting?

For fuck's sake Bump...

---

Flipped channels and landed on the golf tournament The Players Championship, and inside the ropes is a security guard with a gun on his hip, very clearly seen on TV.
Somebody thinks he needs it.

If it was a fan walking around with a gun on their hip make the call but a trained professional security guard?

I suppose because police carry guns on their hip in public it's the same thing huh?

Unbelievable.

Have it your own way guys.
Enjoy your guns. It's your right.
I wish you all the best...

---

Yannih - I feel like I'm as shocked / concerned / flabbergasted / frustrated by all these mass shootings as any other rational person, but I thought NZ is practically gun-free(?) and yet this happened anyway.

It seems like the only way to get rid of guns was to have never had them in the first place ... which, obviously that ship has sailed

---