Shooters Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

A "no cost idea for school security"

5K views 67 replies 27 participants last post by  DOK 
#1 ·
One of the issues the anti gun people are screaming about is the cost of putting armed personnel in the schools.
I've got two suggestions that would cost absolutely nothing to the school systems across the country.

#1. There are thousands of retired police officers, security guards, and military personnel as well as civilians with CCW permits that are perfectly qualified to guard our kids at school. Many of these folks are looking for ways to volunteer their time for great causes. None could be better than this. Many of these folks are already volunteering many hours per week in places like the VA, hospitals, the Red Cross, etc. We (or the NRA) could train these people specifically for school security and schedule each of them for a few days a week and there would be more than enough of these people available that several could be on duty at the same time in order to secure the entire school campus adequately. And the reality is there would be thousands of these folks that would love to volunteer for this purpose.
My gosh...we already have un-paid volunteers doing work for the school systems such crossing guards for example; so why not for armed security as well.
I'm sure however there would be those that think you need to be a Navy Seal, Special Forces, or a member of a swat team to guard kids at school; but that's a bunch of non-sense.
Many of these school personnel are so up in arms about having armed personnel on the premisis that it's like they have images of swat teams roaming the halls. They need to be educated that a school could be heavilly secured with armed personnel and neither the kids or the staff would even realize there are guns on the premisis.

#2. How about the thousands of National Guard or military personnel that are on our country's payroll and many of them doing absolutely nothing. Put them to work in plain clothes guarding schools.

Those that are so paranoid about having armed personnel around their kids should go talk to the parents of the 20 kids that were lost last week. I doubt you could find one parent that would say they would have been appalled at the thought that a "good guy with a gun" would be in the shcool building on that day.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
I brought this exact subject up to our school security director. Our middle and high schools already have police officers stationed at the schools, just not our elementary. I would be more than glad to donate one day a week to help protect my grandsons.
 
#5 ·
The volunteer idea is the best I've heard yet. I'd pull a couple days a week myself.
 
#7 ·
Great ideas.
One of the things to be considered when we try and put up solutions to the whole school security issue of using teachers and other un-trained folks is that just by having a CCW, it does not make one a qualified "security" person. I am all in favor of all of the ideas for securing our schools with all the available resources, but I want those who will be protecting my children qualified..I mean really qualified.
I have had permits in 3 different states and nowhere in those tests was I schooled on how to react in a shooter situation and my protecting dozens of others. Now, I have no problem assuming that role and doing my best with past training in my life, but what we need is well trained folks, and good security systems in those schools.
beaglenc
 
#8 ·
"Qualification" ruins all. You are surrounded by millions of Americans with guns who are all "unqualified."

"To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss." Federalist 29

The value in having potentially armed school staff is in the deterrence. Their actual shooting skills are secondary. It is the duty of people to protect their community. They are generally happy to do it. Witness volunteers here. Getting government to manage it will absolutely ruin it.

Are we to suppose the people of Newtown are happy an unqualified gun owner didn't stop the shooter?

Joe
 
#10 · (Edited)
Any volunters must have a minimum ability with their weapon of choice, obviously and be put through sufficient stress before a qualification test to ensure they are up to the mark. What is far more important is the choice of the right person for the job. "Strutters" and "Braggers" are not required. A person doing this job has to blend into the background for the sake of the kids. I do think the idea of using ex police/military is a good one because they have the already fairly solid training and have no need to flash themselves about. With all of this volunteering the premises of the school requires some serious protection from maniacs or any others entering without passing through a check point. Obviously the size of the school will regulate how many of these check points are required. I would have thought that someone would already have instigated this upgrade for ALL schools in the USA considering this is not the first time.
In addition metal detectors would prevent supposedly bona fidae schoolkids bringing anything in. Ouch how about the cost ?? OK How many kids?
500 700 1000 .... Each parent chips in $50 a year for starters ... produces $25000 to $50000, then look at advertising/sponsors to raise additional funds, then turn to local and national government.
I do agree that if you let any government agency organise this then it will all go to rat doo doo, like most other things they get involved with.
 
#29 ·
that's because a large part of the country doesn't prescribe to the idea of more government which equals more taxes. that's all that's ever talked about during elections - I don't want government touching my healthcare, I don't want government touching my guns, etc, etc. why would a government regulated mandate for armed guards be any different?

While I don't disagree with the idea of volunteers, IMO, we have to consider the following:
1. No school district should have any mandate placed on them if they don't want armed guards. If a district doesn't want this, that's their choice. Kids may then relocate to another district, or a private school that does take security seriously. Of course, the same district could gain other kids if the surrounding population had such beliefs. This is easier done in population centers where those options are available. Many rural areas wont have these different school options.

2. Some sort of training program would be needed for any armed personnel in schools. Certain parts of training may be more or less, depending upon the volunteer.

3. Volunteerism is that, and all doing so need to understand the risks. I am skeptical that stepping into a role where someone might be risking their life (albeit, a low probability), or legal action (higher probability) against them would attract many without some pay.

IMO, costs will rise, no matter what options will be pursued.
agreed
 
#12 ·
Great ideas all. Now for reality. The parents and school boards won't buy it because they know more than we do. Secondly why have a CCW if you can see the gun you are carrying? If you have armed guards they know where they are and will take them out first. Secondly this guy in Newtown blasted his way in and didn't care if anyone knew he was there or what his intentions were. You cannot counter someone whose best day is to die at the end of it and take as many people with him as he can. We will not give. We can't give up anything because they will see it as sign of weakness and then it is over. My 2-cents. Lou
 
#13 ·
Let me just preface this by saying I think safety in the schools is hugely important but there are a couple of problems with all these ideas being thrown around.

One being, these people from the community (ex-LEOs, Vets, etc...) will not "blend" in the school. You are either a student or a teacher or someone else - and its not hard to spot "someone else" no matter how much they think they blend. Especially if class is in session, i.e. empty halls and common spaces except for 1 or 2 plain clothed guys.

Second being this; with the knowledge that there is someone armed in the school besides the shooter, who becomes the first target?? Once they're down it becomes any other shooting we've seen.
 
#14 ·
That is why in my suggestion I included a security fenced outer perimeter with controlled access. CCTV is very cheap these days so the perimeter could be under constant observation and with access only through secured access points then warning of any attack would be well before the assailant got into the building which is what happened here I believe.

Whatever, nothing is going to be absolutely foolproof ...wonder how many spies are floating around our and your most protected areas today ??
 
#15 ·
It is an excellent idea, to allow for the voluntary CCW of teachers. In many of the schools in our district there are retired military, active national guardsmen, and ex LEO's already in place. I might point out that this is already in place in UTAH, and teachers can and do carry.

Guns will never go away, you can ban them but they will not go away. We have a great police force they have a tough job, but they can not be everywhere. Its a proven fact that an immediate violent reaction to mass shooting violence saves lives. These sub human beings when faced with resistance break off and surrender or kill themselves. 5 to 20 mins to wait for LEO's to show up is to late.

An armed teacher willing to carry is going to be a far greater deterrent standing in front of the door hiding there class then the brave souls that did it unarmed.

God Bless
GF
 
#17 ·
I do think that just the knowledge that there is an armed and trained presence in the schools would deter many such instances.
As I have stated in another thread,
"I think that thse types of folks are basically cowards. That's why they always take their own lives. They are not interested in "shooting it out" at all, or they would. If they thought their plan might get them killed or captured before accomplishing their goal, they might go after a "softer" target. That won't help the rest of us out there in the world, but we are adults and I will take my chances, BUT, protect my children at all costs. Yes, if it means money that will go into the security of my childrens school, I am all for it."
 
#18 ·
You probably need to remove the National Guard from your list of potential guards ! Nearly all NG personel have real life jobs , thus aren't available for the Guard pool . I don't see any need for the guards to blend , it's better to be visable and serve as a deterrent also . I want the perp to know I'm there , and willing and able to kill them on a moments notice !
 
#24 ·
While I don't disagree with the idea of volunteers, IMO, we have to consider the following:
1. No school district should have any mandate placed on them if they don't want armed guards. If a district doesn't want this, that's their choice. Kids may then relocate to another district, or a private school that does take security seriously. Of course, the same district could gain other kids if the surrounding population had such beliefs. This is easier done in population centers where those options are available. Many rural areas wont have these different school options.

2. Some sort of training program would be needed for any armed personnel in schools. Certain parts of training may be more or less, depending upon the volunteer.

3. Volunteerism is that, and all doing so need to understand the risks. I am skeptical that stepping into a role where someone might be risking their life (albeit, a low probability), or legal action (higher probability) against them would attract many without some pay.

IMO, costs will rise, no matter what options will be pursued.
 
#25 ·
I think "LRShooter" gave an excellent explanation of the functions of a school security officer in the "How does Israel protect their school children?" thread. It's a lot more than just standing around waiting for the bad guys, but addresses overall security processes they would be involved with.

Dan
 
#26 ·
Better idea Turkey receives around 21 billion a year from us in foreign aid so lets cut that in half and take 10 billion and divide it up so that each school gets a equal share for hiring and training these retired Vets, Police ect. That would be roughly $100000 per school to train and employ these security personal as there is around 100000 public schools in the US. Just think what we could do to reduce unemployment in this country and lowering the debt. And just imagin if we stoped all foreign aid to countries that hate us and used it to improve our schools and by adding shooting clubs with indoor ranges and requiring all our students to learn the proper safe use and handling of firearms.
 
#27 ·
Very good point 264WM!
Our own country is suffering and yet we continue giving away billions of dollars every year to forign countries. With all the money that is wasted in this country we could afford free health care for every citizen in the country and protect our kids.
 
#31 ·
This Christmas morning my daughter-in-law and I talked about this subject. She was alarmed about all of the different entries into my grandaughters school. I think she is right and this is another problem to consider. Make it like going to the movies, one way in, one way out.
 
#32 ·
Closed-circuit TV is really great for identifying the victims afterwards. When the attackers are suicidal, I don't think it's too useful. I've pulled footage from security cameras for the police before and mostly, it's so grainy as to be useless.

I don't see much alternative but to have trained police on school campuses, to be able to guard against this sort of thing. And yeah..... they need to have police training. Sorry, but getting a CHL hardly qualifies. I say this knowing quite a few folks with CHLs, including family members, whom I would not feel comfortable in that role.

Besides, too much liability to have anything but a commissioned officer. No offense to the retired LEO, they would surely be able to re-qualify.
 
#39 ·
I agree Joe.
My very first thought when I heard about placing armed security in the schools is that the school administration and most parents, if they go along with this at all, are going to complicate this to death and demand that these guys have the training of the Green Beret.
Heck Barney Fife with his one bullet in his shirt pocket probably could have handled this latest weasle.

All kidding aside folks. I agree that these folks will need some training and be screened for background and school environment compatibility. But lets keep our heads here folks. Next thing you know, what could be a simple and cost effective solution by using capably trained volunteers is going to end up very costly because we ultimately require that these people be a combination of Batman, Superman, and Arnold Schwartzenager with a PHD in child psychology.
 
#36 ·
When it comes to lives of your children, is anyone going to say they won't pay for it if it's the best solution? I think the true roadblock to this armed security idea for schools is going to be the most obvious - the hoplophobes and gun-haters. When they envision their children attending class with unicorns and leprechauns beneath a cotton candy-pink sky with rainbows everywhere, throwing an armed guard into that picture is not going to make them happy.
 
#37 ·
I think we can agree that a gun ban will not work.
So I won't even address that part and if someone insists on dragging that into an attempt to refute what I'm suggesting, they aren't paying attention and are so fixated that they really need to take a deep breath, go have a seat in the bathroom and have a good BM because they are way too uptight.

We already have uniformed officers in the schools up here. We have not had a school shooting in Alaska, since Bethel.
The problem then becomes controlled access points. Sus isn't too far off base. A simple 6 foot chain link fence would suffice. No razor wire, no double fence lines, no mine fields. You can do that at your home if you like and feel the need.

MikeG, video has progressed. At the university I attend and used to work, there is digital video surveillance. The cameras installed in 2003 are nice and clear enough to positively identify a person and were used to stop peepers and locker thieves as they made it possible to identify someone entering and leaving the locker rooms and the exterior access doors.
The problem with poor video quality comes from long distance and going for it on the cheap.

Teachers are tasked with enough already that asking them to carry in the school is a poorly thought out idea. Sure, it sounds like a nice easy fix, but if you have ever been in their shoes, you soon realize it isn't. Nice, easy fixes tend not to be good fixes. As a student teacher in 1997, with a tenured teacher near by, I had enough to do already. In a classroom of 24-30 kids, your first concern is the ones in your classroom. There are lots of opinions being thrown out, but little with concern for the reality of teaching.

And as a side note, the kids don't see the police SRO unless they are worried about them. Same with the parents.
 
#38 ·
OneOldSap,

Contrary, There are National Guard and Reserve soldiers who's actual jobs are in education. The one's I have spoken to high school teachers would be willing, both the gentleman I know have combat arms experience. They are educators first, win win deal.

And yes, Voluntary and Willing is critical.

good luck
GF
 
#41 ·
My idea...

In retail sales, there are security cameras. These cameras may or may not be in the store all the time. I was forced to resign in 1991 because my cashier pilfered the register and I got the blame, being his manager. There was no camera in place that day to catch him stealing-- it moved around from store to store. We can put returning soldiers in place at the schools. One on-duty today, but somewhere else tomorrow. He'd come and go in an unmarked car-- preferably his own. We don't want him arriving in a black, four-door, Ford Crown Victoria with blackwall tires. Just screams "COP!!" We need stealth, but we also need to let potential thugs know there's a sworn peace officer (swear the soldiers) on duty and he will put a slug in your assets in you try something stupid. I think we can scrounge up the men for this, and keep the thugs guessing...

Another idea: Put a car with a simple decal on it that basically says "Lawman here!" in the parking lot. A thug, who's 98% coward anyway, will not encroach. Just the seeming presence of the law makes these filth scamper. How many of us have slowed down when we see the empty patrol car parked on the street, or just in the bushes? See, a "presence" works...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top