Is it realistic to believe that a teacher could effectively defend against an active shooter, using an AR-15, armed with only a handgun?

To address the "I'm sick of the soft target talk camp" I don't believe any rational person wants to see "Fortress Amerika" that being said there is a difference between soft targets and "wide frikkin open here are the sheep for the slaughter targets" that IS what most smaller schools are. No guns in the government buildings, there are armed guards & metal detectors in those buildings. Hell my home town can only afford one custodian during the day to cover three campuses. Dude that's a lot of puke to clean up during Flu and Virus season. Much less be able to afford effective armed security. So tell me what you want to do. Leave the gate open? Many schools in this area have former military teaching. Most have teachers that also farm or are Agg teachers. let them be armed. I'm not saying to arm someone who has never handled a weapon before, it can be done responsibly.

Yes, you need to consider the psychology of the shooter. Most are pissed of D&D teen rejects that think it's going to be like a video game. If they even sniff that someone is hunting them back most are going to give up and either surrender or shoot themselves.

I say, if the "perp" is on the end of a weapon taking down innocents, he's as good as dead! End of story!

Is it realistic to assume a teacher can just bring a weapon to a school without training? Is it realistic to assume teachers will all be forced to carry a weapon?
Any person with training in a hand gun and competent enough to know when and how to use it, stands a very good chance against an inexperienced shooter with a long gun, especially in close quarters like a school.

Hard to really say. As the only deterrent to a situation, I would say no. But combined with controlled access and egress points, physical security measures such as metal detectors and and armed security, yes, it could work.

People, regardless of whether they have had next to no training or thousands of hours are going to react differently to the fog of war. There is a gun shot, the sound of a gun shot, a person runs by bloody or someone screams gun and there is a response in the body that is uncontrollable. Our adrenaline goes up, our pulse quickens and we become hyper aware, time seems to slow for some and speed up for others. This is what is known as a fight or flight response and we all have it to some degree. Simply going out onto a range and firing off a few rounds will not trigger it. Sure, that will trigger anticipation, even fear but not fight or flight.

Fight or flight and how the person handles it and is trained to handle it, determines how they will react in a hostile environment with an active shooter.

If teachers are WELL-Trained like they are as teachers in their specific field, then, yes it is realistic. If they only get a once a year course, then it is very questionable. I give a course called "Civilian Response to an Active Shooter" in which I touch on schools and another one which is designed for schools. My experience is that nearly all school administrations do not want to "give up the command and control" function they have by directing their teachers what they have to do in the incident when they could be floors or buildings away from the teacher. That's similar to a Bn CO telling the line company CO in the field what to do next when he has no "eyes" or comm on the field situation. The same is found in the law enforcement environment.
In short, ALL teachers should be trained in what to do WHEN the intruder breaks down the locked and hopefully, barricaded door and attempts to kill the teacher and/or the children. That is what is called "Counter"...the intruder's life or the teacher's/children's lives are at stake. No holds barred then. Use whatever is at hand, river rocks, small bats, fie extinguishers, chairs, desks, staplers, etc. etc.

If we can’t keep shooters out of schools, then armed and we’ll trained teachers are our best solutions. If law enforcement won’t confront then who will?

No LCpl... your exactly correct in your assessment. Fog of war, tunnel vision, training, mental state of the defender, the willing to go where others flee... You point out an obvious statement... Dallas, Texas, 6 LEO's are dead, 11 wounded... these were your first line defenders, the first responders to an active shooter and they got their asses handed to them by a deranged sub human shitbird well armed, with discipline garnered from the subhumans mental state.

These fallen officers in Dallas were a prime example why even when you train for deadly encounters, you can shoot all day long and not hit a damn thing. The stress alone by being shot at...by a so called fellow American on American soil. First hand I say this with some credible background... being a street cop is far different than being a soldier on the battle zone... In war you know who your after...anyone with a gun dressed in a different flag... Anyone in a place they are not supposed to be at... but on the streets here at home...?

The intruder is not a human anymore when it is an active shooter here in America... The human isn't an American any more, and worst of all... the suspect has civil rights. The suspect could be your next door neighbors kid who was bullied in 4th grade... a taxi driver who tripped over not getting a tip last week from the asshole drunk fare who spat on him/her or a gang banger wannabe who is making his name in the ranks of the Al Capone history...

We are at war with a mental health issue in America that requires government oversight... but as with all government programs...eventually it will reach an overprotective delima...and over reach its intended purpose... give the government an inch and they will take it...all.

Arming teachers is a face value move. Arming teachers is one step to preventative policing in the school yard...but teacher have a far different mental health state than police... They educate... Teachers... like police are now, more than ever, social engineers... Police answer the call that may have them take someones life. They know it when they get into this profession... Teachers however are not the type of mental capacity person that they might have to take a life to save a life...

The only educator that might be able to fit into the police syndrom social engineer are the sports coaches... or anyone that has a conservative view or instructional background...but today, most of the educational staff is a left-liberal mindset... conservatism instructional staff in the primary and secondary school systems...are long disappearing.

Instructional staff have a set standard of what to teach and follow a passive instructional course...raise a hand to a child on the playground or in the school room... Oh hell no... you slap that kid, your going to face a criminal charge of battery by the kid and the kids parents. Just think of the consequences if a teacher shoots a kid and that kid lives... or a kid grabs the gun from a distracted armed staff member and kills another...?

We get it. It is a difficult job. Stress is so bad that the staticians even put out the average age of a dead cop is now like age 54, two to 5 years out of retirement or something like that... Most of the teachers I had back in my day died at age 80-90.

Some instructional staff being armed is simply a choice to consider to bolster deterrence... but they must be trained and have retraining throughout the year as long as they are the designated "deterrers". It is... a means to put some other forms of a first responder on the ground.

One school resource officer for every 1,000 to 5,000 kids in one school isn't enough of a deterrence on its surface to deflect the concept that any attacker will alter their state of mind. There must be an equal amount of deterrence combined with mental health awareness and education. ...and an overbearing police presence in the school will (Notice I said "will" as in mandatory-not "can" as if permissible) lead to a forced educational system under an armed threat to educate.

Gun control is another issue... anyone posting threats to kill in the media, need to be held accountable for their actions, and all firearms removed permanently from their possession and subjected to unannounced home/office/residence of searches and seizures of any firearms found and an incarceration immediately following. Free speech can have limitations... and it can have repercussions, but they must be made known to those sub-human Americans who live around us.

The weapon is only the means. It has nothing to do with the mental state of the person pulling the trigger. Directly addressing the trigger puller...is the final resolution.

Every now and then... a Dallas or Las Vegas event happens and they happen because of the mental state of the trigger puller. Every mass shooting event over the last 40 years... can be directly tied to the trigger puller... and over the years...mental health continues to be ignored by the politicians and the ones with the purse strings needed to address the mental health issue in America.

And LCpl... this is only scratching the surface...and this response is of course...my humble opinion.

Look you have people caring weapons guarding important people all over the world, why not our kids, they are more important than anything .If you are trained right you can take out the bad guys

In my opinion yes. A handgun could potentially be used to defend oneself and others against someone armed with an AR-15. A person who has more training on their handgun than the perp with the AR-15 would increase their odds of winning a gun fight. Better knowledge of the layout of a school might also be a factor that could lean factors toward a teacher with a handgun. I say it is certainly a more even match than the schools that have placed peeble jars, marbles, or mini baseball bats as tool of defense. I would say that any of these tools is better than bare hands against an AR-15, but the proof that teachers need to be armed is in the fact that the schools are already providing some form of a weapon, i.e. bats, rocks, marbles. What is utterly laughable and ridiculous is that folks have such a huge anti-gun bias that they would rather a teacher attempt to use a bat, a rock, or a marble to protect kids against an AR-15 than a Glock or Sig pistol.