TexasCHLforum.com

Texas Lt. Gov. calls for gun training for teachers
By: Jason Hart (Diary) | January 11th, 2013 at 01:30 PM
http://austin.ynn.com/content/top_stori ... r-teachers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst has called for state-funded specialized firearms training for teachers and administrators to guard against school shootings.

Dewhurst said school districts would nominate who they wanted to carry weapons on campus. The training would be more extensive than what is currently required for Texas concealed handgun license and include how to react technically and emotionally in an active shooter situation on a school campus.

right after I tweeted #txlege about OH I saw it for Texas ....
1:14 PM - 11 Jan 13

#TXLEGE Over 1,000 Educators Apply for Armed Teacher Training http://www.redstate.com/jasonahart/2013 ... um=twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

from http://www.redstate.com/jasonahart/2013 ... um=twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Employment as an educator and a valid concealed carry permit in the applicant’s state of employment are the only prerequisites for the Armed Teacher Training Program, which will build on the basics taught in concealed carry classes.

BFA mentioned that “medical trauma care, mindset, general school security, etc.” may be covered in the training, but that the program “will focus primarily on armed response to an ‘active killer’ scenario.”

The program will be free of charge for those who enroll, with all costs – currently estimated at $1,000 per student – to be paid by the nonprofit Buckeye Firearms Foundation. While most of the 1,048 applicants as of January 9 were from Ohio, educators from other states have also signed up.

This is fantastic. Does anyone know if the WatchDog Dads program has done anything like this in the past? I volunteer as a Watchdog at my son's school quite often and would gladly volunteer my time as an armed presence if that were to ever be a possibility.

Got to love the logic of using those who are already on campus to protect children. It would be nice to see on body carry required also

Sign me up!

Longhorn-breeder wrote:Got to love the logic of using those who are already on campus to protect children. It would be nice to see on body carry required also

I think on the body would be good for most, but I'm not sure that kindergarten 1st grade and some special education teachers have particular issues with physical contact with students. Disallowing these type of teachers would be wrong. Forcing a choice of carrying on person or not at all isn't such a great choice.

Liberty wrote:I think on the body would be good for most, but I'm not sure that kindergarten 1st grade and some special education teachers have particular issues with physical contact with students.

There's potential for physical contact at other levels as well. These schools are often extremely overcrowded. Go into a typical Houston public high school or middle school at lunch, or between classes and you will see people moving like a herd shoulder to shoulder through the hallways. Go in at the right time, and you will find teachers and staff physically struggling to control one or two, or even more children who have gone berzerk.

I don't know if I would be comfortable with waistband carry. I think I could only do it withwith a shoulder-holster and a single-stack.

http://www.chron.com/default/article/De ... 187896.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"I think all we would succeed in doing is getting some teachers killed," said Houston Federation of Teachers president Gayle Fallon. "The other issue is, I don't really want to see a gunbattle with a bunch of small children around."Fallon, worried about students gaining access to guns in a classroom, said state lawmakers should fund more uniformed police officers in schools.

Mental health aid

Grier said additional funding also would allow schools to hire more mental health professionals "to help address the real issue." Any decision to arm teachers would be up to the school board, Grier said, noting that police officers undergo significant training.

"Is the next step to train all of our bus drivers to carry guns?" Grier said. "This is a very complex issue with no easy answers."

The Houston Independent School District has armed police at all middle and high school campuses and officers patrol the elementary schools.

At least one Texas district, Harrold ISD near the Oklahoma border, already allows teachers to carry concealed weapons, and others near Kerrville are considering it, according to local media.

Caronetta Jones, the president of the HISD Council of PTAs, said she would be outraged if teachers at her grandson's high school, or any school, were armed.

"Violence against violence - no," she said. "Even if you train the teachers, I totally disagree with that."

Wrong priorities

Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, said Perry and Dewhurst should concentrate on improving education instead of calling for more guns.

"It is fairly obvious to the people of Texas that teachers need books - not guns - in the classrooms," Martinez Fischer said.

David Rider, the police chief for Fort Bend ISD, expressed reservations about equipping teachers with firearms. Like HISD, the district has armed police officers at its secondary campuses.

"It goes back to training," said Rider, the son of a school principal and counselor. "Right now, police officers are more qualified and have training for critical incidents, as opposed to the average citizen with a concealed handgun license."

Houston Police Department Chief Charles McClelland, asked last month about arming educators, echoed the difference between professional officers and citizens who have just fired at stationary targets.

"I hope our schools remain institutions of learning where kids go to be educated and they're safe and they're not turned into armed camps," he said. "That would be my desire"


Makes you kinda understand what we are up against....total complete stupidity

I don't really want to see a gunbattle with a bunch of small children around.

Watching executions of helpless people is preferable? That's the alternative, choose ...

sheesh

It is not stupidity, it is misinformation; naivete if you will, and abdject terror! As I wander the halls doing my job I hear so much absolute misinformation. Depending upon the situation I may try to correct them, but often doing so would put me in a very awkward situation, so I just swallow bile, say a prayer and continue with my job. I would lay odds that more than half of the people so dead set against on body carry by teachers, including by special ed teachers, have absolutely NO idea what is involved in concealed carry.

What do mothers do that carry?? Do they not let their own kids within their personal space? Never hold their toddlers? The argument about "crowded halls" is bunk, what do each of us do when we are in crowded situations? How often do the general public disarm a CHL carrier? Concealed is concealed, this would mean that the students would have NO need to know who was carrying. It would be no different than going about daily business anyplace else.

I did not stop hugging, lugging and cuddling with my nieces, nephews, and my own children over 2 years ago when I got my license? I did not stop hugging folks at church and out and about. I know for a fact I could do my job with my side arm, and my job is often very physically demanding and up close and personal with the students, and no one would need to or obviously know that I had it with me. I could do so safely and pretty darn comfortably! Because I have taken the time and effort and invested in my God given right to my personal protection and to set myself up for success with the proper equipment. I also strive to achieve proper training well above and beyond the basic CHL requirements. I am no different than many of the fine folks I have met since making this incredible journey two years ago. If you had asked me 2 years ago if I thought someone could do a job such as teaching or school nursing carrying a side arm I would have answered NO WAY! A little proper education and experience goes a long way.

Sorry for the rant. I just don't like calling folks stupid who are just simply grossly undereducated and underexperienced. Blessings!

ETA - JMPHO, but I personally and fully believe that if we are to win this war, we; as armed citizens, MUST hold ourselves to a much higher accountability for our behaviour; including how we discuss the uninformed and the "anti's". I understand this is an extremely emotional topic for most of us, and we are entitled to our opinion and feeling frustrated is a given, but calm and cool above and beyond reproach is a must, or we are feeding the opposition. (stepping of of soapbox)

Divided Attention wrote:What do mothers do that carry?? Do they not let their own kids within their personal space? Never hold their toddlers? The argument about "crowded halls" is bunk, what do each of us do when we are in crowded situations? How often do the general public disarm a CHL carrier? Concealed is concealed, this would mean that the students would have NO need to know who was carrying. It would be no different than going about daily business anyplace else.

I did not stop hugging, lugging and cuddling with my nieces, nephews, and my own children over 2 years ago when I got my license? I did not stop hugging folks at church and out and about. I know for a fact I could do my job with my side arm, and my job is often very physically demanding and up close and personal with the students, and no one would need to or obviously know that I had it with me. I could do so safely and pretty darn comfortably! Because I have taken the time and effort and invested in my God given right to my personal protection and to set myself up for success with the proper equipment. I also strive to achieve proper training well above and beyond the basic CHL requirements.

Listen brother, something tells me your children, nieces, or nephews are not sociopathic gang members with Santa Muerte tattooed on their faces. I don't know what the characteristics of your facility are - all I'm saying is that there is not a one-size-fits-all solution here.

When you're making big changes in policy, you need to let the devil's advocate have his say.

The implication that someone who feels the way I do on this is inherently naîve, misinformed, inexperienced, uneducated, and has not taken the time nor invested the effort in proper equipment or training is unfair at best - and frankly, it speaks volumes. If the decision was made to enact this policy I would certainly make myself available in that role. It's not as if there are marksmen roaming the halls everywhere - I might be the only staff member on campus with defensive pistol training of any kind.

To me the appeal of armed staff lies in the opportunity to forgo the creation of a "locked down" school with greater police presence and student tracking. However, the fundamental flaw we are all overlooking is the fact that almost universally, schools have not taken access control seriously.

THX wrote:Listen brother, something tells me your children, nieces, or nephews are not sociopathic gang members with Santa Muerte tattooed on their faces. I don't know what the characteristics of your facility are - all I'm saying is that there is not a one-size-fits-all solution here.

You are absolutely right! There is no one-size-fits-all!!

When you're making big changes in policy, you need to let the devil's advocate have his say.

The implication that someone who feels the way I do on this is inherently naîve, misinformed, inexperienced, uneducated, and has not taken the time nor invested the effort in proper equipment or training is unfair at best - and frankly, it speaks volumes. If the decision was made to enact this policy I would certainly make myself available in that role. It's not as if there are marksmen roaming the halls everywhere - I might be the only staff member on campus with defensive pistol training of any kind.

My reference to naive etc was to the quotes from the teacher's unions and others in the article. I was only saying lets not just blanket them as stupid, but work together to show them that in some cases, allowing CHL holders and trained staff to be armed might not be a bad choice. IN NO MEANS do I ever think any one but trained experts should go in search of goblins, but it sure would be nice not to only lock down with my students, but be able to defend myself and them with something other than a desk and a prayer should the goblins make their way in to where we are hunkered down waiting for help to arrive. I have no cape, bat belt or special training to go confront evil doers. However, I have had some training in cover, concealment and shot placement should they find me in a situation where I have no option but turn and fight.

To me the appeal of armed staff lies in the opportunity to forgo the creation of a "locked down" school with greater police presence and student tracking. However, the fundamental flaw we are all overlooking is the fact that almost universally, schools have not taken access control seriously.

The set up of many campuses in our area is multi building and controlling outside access is basically impossible. In addition many of the older schools area "open concept" without classrooms, but halfwall/portable dividers seperating classes. (an ADD nightmare by the way .) No real cover or concealment to be found. You are also right in this magnitude of change should not be made rashly, and I was not implying at all that I was ready to go to work armed and play superhero. On the contrary, I would love to have the same options to defend me and mine that I have at most places I go.

Thanks for your input, I hope my "orange" above helps to clarify what I was trying to reference in my prior "rant". Getting many perspectives and making a truly informed decision on this important matter.

I just saw this disgusting statement from former Pennsylvania Governor Rendel (D):
http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/forme ... -horrific/

“The good thing about Newtown is, it was so horrific that I think it galvanized Americans to a point where the intensity on our side is going to match the intensity on their side.”

You get that? Ed Rendel sees an upside to the killings of 26 people in Newtown.

That is pathetic and evil at the same time.

The Annoyed Man wrote:I just saw this disgusting statement from former Pennsylvania Governor Rendel (D):
http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/forme ... -horrific/

“The good thing about Newtown is, it was so horrific that I think it galvanized Americans to a point where the intensity on our side is going to match the intensity on their side.”

You get that? Ed Rendel sees an upside to the killings of 26 people in Newtown.

Isn't that the old "never let a crisis go to waste" mentality?