Posted on Feb 22, 2018
Is it realistic to believe that a teacher could effectively defend against an active shooter, using an AR-15, armed with only a handgun?
116K
2.16K
1.04K
320
319
1
After the shooting in Florida many people began to say arm the teachers. But they over look that a police officer was there. As a Marine I understand how difficult it is to close on and take an active shooter even with the best training and equipment. During the Dallas shooting 11 police officers was injured and another 6 was killed. Out of all the return fire none actually hit the suspect. Infact the suspect was killed by a remote control robot carrying an explosive. The reason why the suspect wasn't killed by a well aimed handgun shot is because of what we call the fog of war. When the shooting starts panic and confusion set in and the way we deal with it in the military is continually to train for those situations week in and week out. But without a third of the training people are expecting teachers to be able to identify the location of the shooter, know the movement of other armed teachers, know the movement of the innocent students and staff, close on the shooter and fire a well aimed shot without putting any students in further danger. Is that realistic?
Active Shooter
New Politics
Children
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 489
0
0
0
Armed teachers should stay in their locked down classrooms to protect the students there. Unless the shooter(s) attack between classes when students are in the hallways, no armed administrators or teachers should be out hunting the shooters. Arming of teachers and admin personnel should be for defensive action from behind locked or barricaded classrooms and offices. The whole point of arming school personnel is to keep the kids and themselves in a safe and secure defendable location until Police can respond. Their weapons should only be deployed if shooters breached their positions and became an immediate threat.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Armed teachers should stay in their locked down classrooms to protect the students there. Unless the shooter(s) attack between classes when students are in the hallways, no armed administrators or teachers should be out hunting the shooters. Arming of teachers and admin personnel should be for defensive action from behind locked or barricaded classrooms and offices. The whole point of arming school personnel is to keep the kids and themselves in a safe and secure defendable location until Police can respond. Their weapons should only be deployed if shooters breached their positions and became an immediate threat.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Hello brothers and sisters in arms. I am a School Security Officer for my school district, along with my military training I received the best active shooter training the county can provide. Our training is guided toward identification of the threat, find the threat and eliminate the threat. I will protect the children, staff and any other innocent by slander at all cost. I agree that the educators job is just that to concentrate on educating the children. Arming them may create more chaos during a threat. As a retired senior nco I am a firm believer in task assestment, by taking preventive steps and not giving those that wishes us harm the opportunity to do so, we can do our part. Most active shooters are copy cats and they are cowards, they seek vulnerability, they prayed on the innocent. When confronted, they either give up or kill themselves. My presence in my school will deter those seeking to harm my children. "Not on my watch".
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
If a teacher is trained in using firearms, volunteers to have access to a gun in the school, then it seems to me that we are overlooking an obvious defensive alternative. No one is saying to mandate or coerce anyone to carry a weapon. My only reservation is how to insure the responsible nature of the teachers in question. I think they would have to volunteer to undergo some psychiatric evaluation to determine their stability and responsible nature and some formal proof of firearm training. I would think the school system could fund such evaluations in order to add a degree of safety to the schools.
If I were a teacher, I would certainly elect to be allowed to have access to a firearm in my class room. As I said, determining the responsible nature of the individual teacher would be the most difficult and sensitive element in implementing such a program - maybe a complete show stopper.
If I were a teacher, I would certainly elect to be allowed to have access to a firearm in my class room. As I said, determining the responsible nature of the individual teacher would be the most difficult and sensitive element in implementing such a program - maybe a complete show stopper.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Recon & clear the area.
1 shooter or more?
Position(s).
Your cover, stealth,& visibility.
Firing to hit vs firing to make an enemy
1) identify location
or
2) waste ammo??
Possibility to coordinate & relay recon info for additional / subsequent support of self & / or the mission.
Timing !
1 shooter or more?
Position(s).
Your cover, stealth,& visibility.
Firing to hit vs firing to make an enemy
1) identify location
or
2) waste ammo??
Possibility to coordinate & relay recon info for additional / subsequent support of self & / or the mission.
Timing !
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I believe that in a perfect world yes someone armed with a handgun could take out some one with an AR. Now I do think a 50 meter or 100 meter shot is expected, but in a close quarters scenario, yes it could possibly happen. However now you have to look at the shoot/don’t shoot scenarios. People might be moving around in panic. There might be a hostage , could that teacher take a well aimed shot? Perhaps. But then again if the intruder wasn’t firing at them, would their anxiety and “fog of war” take place to overcome a well placed shot? With all the training , sometimes it might take experience with a well trained individual to react in a positive manner to take out an armed suspect or suspects.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google