If there is no safety risk, why would you restrict it? You seem to be conflating the behavior of people within the school with the fact that those people happened to be LTC holders. It seems like you would be happiest if nobody but teachers and administrators were allowed allowed onto the campus because some parents/grandparents/people responsible for their children/kin "break the educational environment". Have there been others who have "broken the educational environment" who were not LTC holders? Do you just not remember them because they didn't stand out to you as much?apvonkanel wrote:It seems the fact that I have continually stated I don't believe an LTCer is a safety risk on a campus is repeatedly ignored.
You are proposing creating an elite class of people (teachers with LTCs) who are allowed special privileges not granted to all people of the same class (LTC Holders). After all, all people are equal, some are more equal than others.apvonkanel wrote:This entire thread started with me desiring more armed safety on our public k-12 campuses with less bureaucratic meddling and oversight.
I think you over estimate the damage that was done to the educational environment. I highly doubt that the kids were focused on that for the rest of the day to the complete detriment of their learning potential. Unless it was made a big deal of and continually repeated/rehashed by the adults in the office, depending on age (assuming elementary school here) it probably went completely over the heads of the kids that were in the room and was forgotten before the kids were back in their classrooms.apvonkanel wrote:There are many things that, while not a physical danger, are detrimental to an educational environment. The examples I gave are exactly that (not counting the inebriated driver). Is a parent swearing profusely in the office in front of students dangerous? No. Is it morally wrong for a parent to swear in front of their own child? I don't condone it, but my religious views don't belong in another person's parenting. Did it pretty much stop all learning for the kids in the office that day? Most definitely.
And here you go hyperbolic. What is the good justification for creating an elite class of people? If LTC holders have been judged to be competent to carry into schools, why should it be restricted to those who are educators/school administrators? What makes them special to grant them a privilege not afforded to those not in the education/school administration professions?apvonkanel wrote:When I say I want more Good Guys on campus, I'm also adding that to this point I see no reason why the school staff isn't enough. We could add safety over safety, but at which point do we fall into the safety over-kill towards which coddling parents lean? Heck, we could warp our kids up in bubble warp and never let them leave the house, teaching them via computer. That would prevent school shootings.
Should Campus Carry only apply to professors and those who work for the school?apvonkanel wrote:I'm actually hoping that someone here can present me with a perspective that allows me to see the need for full carrying liberty...
By law, should only lawmakers and their staff be able to carry at the Capitol?
By law, should only theater employees be allowed to carry in theaters because anyone else might cause a scene or be disruptive to the movie-goer's movie watching environment (turning on cell phones, talking during the movie, etc.)?
All the examples above use exactly the same argument as you are trying to make for LTC holding teachers. Unless there is a good justification for restricting a right to all, I do not see why it should be restricted, much less turned into a privilege granted to a special few.