What did you think of the school shooting yesterday? How could the “arming the schools law” have affected it?

@SoDakCampaigns

We can kibbutz over the school shooting that happened in Harrisburg yesterday, because thankfully, there was no loss of life. But very easily, it could have gone badly. Very badly.

Reports note there was a child in the school office at the same time this all occurred, and the event was quickly ended when two school administrators tackled the child shooter.

Would having armed staff in the office or teachers armed as allowed under recently passed state law helped the situation? Or would it have gone far worst, fast?

 

63 thoughts on “What did you think of the school shooting yesterday? How could the “arming the schools law” have affected it?”

  1. More guns equals more shooting and death. Having teachers, principals, or anyone other than a security guard/team armed is a bad idea. It’s why no schools have done it yet. If you want to have a sidearm in school your sole job should be security, not focusing on teaching and then pull a gun out to be a hero.

    1. Wait a minute!? Your answer is more gun free zone in the gun free zone that didn’t work?

        1. “We were quite a distance away from the building where this was happening… Parker noted that he was hustled into a classroom with other students by a professor who asked if anyone was armed. He said he raised his hand and said he would attempt to protect his fellow students if they came under attack.”

  3. The fact is the kid brought a gun to school (a gun-free zone) to shoot someone because he knew that no one there could shoot back. Even if they had an armed security guard, what were the chances that the guard would be in the office with them?

  4. What’s the first reaction by gun control advocates when faced with a dangerous situation and their life or family’s life is threatened? Call someone with a gun to come protect them and hope they get there in time.

  5. Given the situation, it had the best possible outcome. Nobody was killed, the only injury was a flesh wound, and the suspect is facing charges

    This is a testament to the training of Law Enforcement and school Staff.

    Not every situation requires someone using a gun. I would still support the armed school sentinel bill. Not because I want armed teachers, rather so they can get the training how to deal with such situations.

      1. They worked with the school ahead of time, and they had a plan. they didn’t just go in with guns blazing.

        1. By the time the policed arrived, the shooter was long subdued, the school on lockdown, an ambulance called, and the immediate situation fully under control.

          Law enforcement had little of substance to do with this one.

  6. 10 reportedly dead in Oregon juco today. Anyone who doesn’t think this society has some serious issues is nuts. Arming people is not the answer but frankly the lobotomy we need as a country is not going to be easily administered. Love the thought of some that if they would have had a gun things would have been different.

    1. Yes, had more been armed, the stats show that the incident may have been prevented, or the severity lessened.

      But cold hard facts won’t sway touchy-feely liberals.

          1. I don’t remember anything about computers in the bible.

            But I know that computers can be abused in the wrong hands.

  7. People who own a gun are twice as likely to die from a gun violence, and are 17 times more likely to take their own life than those who do not own a gun. Seems to me we could remove the warning labels and let the problem sort itself out.

    1. Well gee–THAT’S WHAT GUNS ARE FOR!

      People with clean water are 10 times as likely to live longer than those who do not.

      People who have access to a doctor are 10 times likely to live longer than those who do not.

      People who have access to a knife are 3 times as likely to kill themselves with a knife than those who do not.

      Any more self evident maxims?

      1. Heavens no! If you’d bother to actually read what I wrote, I’m all for you having more guns!

        1. We all read what you wrote.

          Here’s an interesting tidbit for you: the sun rises in the east.

          Gosh, what insight I have!

  8. Our school district had an training/in-service on Wednesday about how to handle an “active killer” situation. The speaker is a police officer from Iowa and not an anti-gun nut or anything like that, and he is not necessarily a fan of the idea of armed teachers. One sobering statistic was that police officers hit their target about 20% of the time.

  9. So one Iowa police officer’s personal opinions speak for every law enforcement professional in the USA? A public servant’s personal opinions are more important than the public’s 2nd Amendment rights?! What putz would disarm law-abiding citizens? What piss-poor trained putz only hits 20% of what he shoots at?! Sounds like he needs to leave the education of the unarmed to someone who has been sufficiently trained to hit what they aim at.

    1. He is not an anti-gun advocate, so stop with the second amendment. If you want to take a bath with your gun, no one is stopping you.

      The 20% makes a lot of sense. When you stand on a range shooting, you have time to control your breathing, make sure you are in a good stance, take careful aim, slow the heartbeat, and fire. Try doing it when someone else is shooting at you. I have a feeling that your hit ratio would also go down. I would be okay if there was a resource officer armed in every school, but I am not okay with some hot-head or a person that has had 12 hours of training over a couple of weekends adding to the situation.

    2. Schools pay good money (+travel money) to bring in these “experts”, whether on crisis control, violence, bullying, shootings, or whatever.

      It’s a good way for a police officer to make some cash on the side or in retirement.

  10. The only person that can stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good person with one. Create a gun free zone, and the crazies go to the “gun free zones” knowing the law abiding will obey the law. This principal was a brave soul as well as 2 brave men that threw their bodies at an armed individual. No law would have stopped this. The results with Sandy Hook were far worse as the principal had gun shots throwing herself at the shooter un-successfully. Proper trading with the sentinel program is a good start. If these three men hadn’t stopped the shooter, who would have beyond the office? What is the left proposing to protect staff and the children? An officer responds to a situation when called. Gun free zones DONT WORK. Laws won’t prevent this.

    1. Ymouse, you probably don’t realize you just contradicted yourself here.

      You just wrote “The only person that can stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good person with one.” And, of course, that is the exact opposite of what happened.

      Thanks for the perfect example of how a concept that can fit on a bumper sticker, while easy to memorize and regurgitate, is really not the way to have credibility when discussing these complicated topics.

      You make a good point about gun free zones not stopping any crazy from carrying a gun into a gun free zone. Just like laws against murder don’t stop people from murdering. Laws against abortion didn’t stop women from getting abortions before Roe v. Wade.

      Because a reasonable person can’t put all liberals in the same basket or put all conservatives in the same basket, I think the real issue is this:

      What do the Republicans in Congress intend to do to address out-of-control gun violence? They’re the ones who refuse to budge on any possible remedy. So they prove at every opportunity that they are satisfied with the way things are.

      Some advocate open carry in gun free zones, but that isn’t going to work either, in the real world.

      Others – just want to pray the problem away.

      That’s not working, either. The problem is getting worse. Congressional Republicans won’t budge. So we can only deduce that they are satisfied with the situation.

      Oh, and it’s Obama’s fault.

      1. “The problem is getting worse”

        You contradicted yourself there, without realizing it.

        The problem is NOT getting worse.

        But, the man who won’t read is no different than the man who can’t.

      2. I wouldn’t go as far to suggest that it’s Obama’s fault, but he has created and promoted a climate of fear and lawlessness that permeates todays society.

        His policies and his words do appeal to the crazies among us. It’s no wonder than some really take him to heart and do evil things.

  11. Heisenberg,

    The presumption of your comment is there is a federal solution that is viable to stop a person from walking into a place with unfettered access (or in this case with an expectation to be in the school AND principals office) and doing mayhem.

    Unless you have an idea not been proposed, in reality the only means to mitigate/stop a random act of violence is to have a random counter-weapon in the same place.

    As a statistician, neither all ideas I have heard from the left or right, has better odds than a random counter weapon.

    1. Troy, I am not making any presumptions in my post. In fact I pointed out that laws against murder don’t stop murder. And laws against abortion did not stop abortion before Roe v. Wade.

      I pointed out that Ymouse contradicted himself and that it was a typical error made by the bumper sticker logic one reads so much in blogs. Easy to memorize and regurgitate, but short on context for a complicated topic.

      I point out to Ymouse that the congressional Republican response to the mass murders is a two-pronged strategy:

      1. Open carry

      2. Pray it away

      Then I point out that it’s the Republicans who won’t consider anything – anything – to address the gun violence problem. And by doing so, they de facto are demonstrating that they are satisfied with the status quo. Well, except for arming everybody, which unfortunately hasn’t been accomplished yet.

      The gun violence problem in America does not have a short and easy solution. But there are some things that might be able to help – like background checks – which something over 90% of responsible gun owners support.

      So there are really four choices here.

      1. Arm everybody.

      2. Pray it away.

      3. Admit that we are not smart enough to solve it and be absolved of any responsibility.

      4. At least try to do something – even something small – about it.

      Oh, and there’s a fifth.

      5. Continue to let the gun lobby bend America over, knowing full well that all their rhetoric is dogma but accepting it because they can deliver votes.

  12. I completely agree. Not sure why Heisenberg has failed to grasp my post. Couple typos but I stand by what I posted.

    1. So I respect that you stand by your post. And I think I grasped it just fine. In fact, I agreed with you that just having a law doesn’t stop crime. And then I pointed out that laws against murder do not stop murder. And laws against abortion did not stop abortion before Roe v. Wade.

      You contradicted yourself in your very first line. And that’s OK – even entertaining! It gave me an opportunity to once again point out that bumper sticker logic like that is easy to memorize and regurgitate, but is really short on context when addressing complex issues like this.

      But the part I could not agree with is that you lay the criticism at the liberals to come up with a solution. And they have proposed many. Remember the effort to just get simple background checks done? Shot down in a huge ball of flame by Republicans. Despite 90% or so of responsible gun owners supporting it. But the NRA spewing 2nd Amendment dogma while supplying campaign funds and votes.

      I think that most open-minded, reasonable people understand that the reason gun violence is not being addressed – other than praying it away – is because Republicans refuse to budge on it. And I point out that by doing nothing – and especially by preventing anything to be done to address it – that Republicans are de facto satisfied with the current status.

  13. A total gun ban isn’t feasible in the United States, as it’s completely impossible to implement given: one, the number of guns currently in circulation, two, the number of guns held by criminals who would *not* turn them over; three, the number of lawful gunowners who would not comply (but who aren’t the problem anyway); four, the ability of gun manufacturing to go to Mexico and still be smuggled in; five, the fact that such a ban is unconstitutional.

    In light of that, I think the only real answer is that if more people were armed and potential shooters knew that, they’d be less likely to try it in the first place, or succeed if they did.

    It’s a social/cultural problem, and one not easily addressed by law or government policies.

    1. It is a tough problem. So let’s just admit we’re not smart enough to solve it and then arm everybody. Good call, Mr. Beal!

      1. Actually, YOU’RE not smart enough to solve it.

        Remember, the man who refuses to hear the truth is no different than the man who is deaf.

    2. crossgrain, I’m not sure they want to see that kind of evidence in here. It’s going to make some heads hurt. It’s probably some liberal plot to take my guns away. It’s Obama’s fault.

      Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi!

  15. Heisenberg,

    Solutions have to be viable and not one’s that give the impression of trying “to do something – even something small – about it.” The latter is at its core misleading as it gives an false sense of security.

    Small efforts against random acts/occurrences are at best of infinitesimal impact and if they give an illusion of anything more are likely more harmful than beneficial. Its really simple math.

    The foolishness of every proposal from the left as alluded to by the President yesterday is matched by most of the proposals from the right. For instance, training and giving teachers/principals to be armed having a statistical impact on the 20 occurrences a year (discussed below), what happened in Oregon or what happened in Harrisburg is equally infinitesimal. Even if the teacher in Oregon was armed, the likelihood of that teacher being able to draw faster than this unexpected gunman is so remote as to be ludicrous.

    I’m all for concealed and open carry but I’m not deluded to think it will have any impact on the total number of gun violence deaths in schools, etc. There is a reason law enforcement has protocols where they aren’t armed (prisons for instance) because of the risk of the gun being taken away from the officer. That rationale is applicable to not allowing a significantly less trained teacher to be armed.

    Bang for the buck to mitigate risk and deaths is better spent in lockdown procedures and tools such as reinforced doors etc.

    We have 54 million K-12 students in 132,000 separate schools in the US. We have roughly 20 acts of violence using a gun in a school a year (about 15 a year done by students and the rest by adults). At the end of the day, a child is safest when in school. Of the 1,500 children murdered a day, 90+% are killed by a family member at home, 1% killed at school, and the rest killed mostly as random acts in their community. The number one “weapon” at home is a pillow or a bathtub. Hands, knives, and blunt instruments are way higher on the list than guns. Guns are near the bottom. But, they sure catch the attention of liberals who have a problem with guns and an irrational fixation that “if we just got rid of guns, we’d have nirvana.”

    Frankly, where I’m going to put my thinking effort and demand politicians spend political capital is not going to be where children are safest but where they are least safe. And just as frankly, when somebody tries to distract me by saying to just “try to do something – even something small – about it (gun violence in schools)” when in all likelihood it isn’t going to materially drop the 15 occurrences a year, I’m going to tune that person out.

        1. In order to initiate change, one must first admit there is a problem. I know you are a peaceful man, Troy. So are the vast majority of us on both sides of the political aisle. Let’s put our heads together on this and fix the problem. This is so not a partisan issue.

    2. Troy, I’m not sure how you define “viable.”

      And though you’re addressing specifically school gun violence in much of your post, any remedies need to address the entire issue of gun violence.

      So I’m going to start with a small thing – background checks – as a first step that will make a difference over the long term, knowing full well that there is no quick fix that’s going to work on the gun violence issue.

      Background checks are supported by over 90% of gun owners and opposed by 100% of criminals, the NRA and many Republicans.

      Can we at least start there?

  16. Troy
    Well stated and researched. I equate the unknown of an audit by the IRS in my thinking. Some people comply because its the right thing to do because of their conscience, some comply for fear of an audit. Statistically speaking, the chance of a audit is extremely low but compliance is high. Will one person hesitate to attack a soft target (schools) not knowing if a staff person in the school is armed or not armed? Its a almost impossible statistic to track.

    Defensive training is much easier to teach then offensive training with a gun. Psychological and police training would be a must along with annual certification. Random audits as well regarding an individuals record. Maybe just adding more police officers to the schools is easier and less expensive. That police car that’s left parked in front of the airport in Sioux Falls is there as a reminder and a deterrent. We were lucky that 2 men chose to step into harms way unarmed and sacrifice themselves potentially for the safety of that school. That’s asking a lot of school staff and I have the utmost respect for those 2 brave men.

    You have made me re-think the sentential program but I’m currently still in favor of it. Doing nothing is better then doing something without knowing it will statistically alter the current course. I do agree with you on that.

  17. Why don’t they allow us nonlethals at least? Pepper spray, stun guns, and the like would be effective, yet, we are not even allowed that. Yes, it does concern me that it would take a half an hour or more for police to respond considering where we are in the county. Meanwhile, a lockdown strategy conveniently keeps students in all of their scheduled classes ready to be systemically executed by a mad man. Rather than being labeled a gun-free campus, we should be called an official soft target ready and waiting for anyone to lose it in a safe and secure environment…for the shooter. Yes, the media played a big role in portraying arming teachers and staff as being extreme. Rather than asking how qualified some of our staff were already in carrying concealed weapons, they went right for the red herring: Where would you centrally store all these weapons, and how would they be distributed in an emergency?

  18. Disgusted Dakotan, I wouldn’t waste my time over at the other place commenting about gun laws or anything else. Many of them live in fantasy land and if things don’t work out for them and they get crushed once again in an election they can retreat to their weed.

  19. Bill,

    Count the K-12 schools. The list you provided includes colleges, etc.

    I didn’t go through the whole list but it looked like less than half were K-12 which would too average about 20 a year.

    1. Okay, I see. Even so, Troy, the other stats I provided consider mass shootings beyond both K-12 and college. You’re not trying to say those don’t count somehow, are you? Personally, I find the combined information astonishing, don’t you? I don’t think it makes any sense to try to minimize it, does it?

  20. This country has always had a proliferation of guns. That’s nothing new. What’s relatively new in the last couple decades is the demise of the family unit, the disregard for human life, poor parenting skills, medicated youth, plain old selfishness, self-absorption and lack of civility or politeness.

  21. Bill,

    I referenced K-12 because everything is easier to define statistically. All students are full-time and their schools are defined entities. And, those instances of gun violence actually occurred in the building. 20 “events” in 132,000 schools. 15 students of 54million. By definition, statisticalyly RANDOM. acts of violence because of remoteness of occurrence.

    If I had referenced colleges, you would have to investigate the incidence to make the conclusion of random or not.

    For instance, was it really a college “event” or something that occurred in a park, is a former student a student or more like a adult passerby? But I am not saying those aren’t important. Just would require more work to make a definitive statement.

  23. Anderbilt: I am just not a fun guy.

    Bill: it makes less sense to change focus from where children are unsafe to the very place they are actually the safest. Further, to do so for political agenda, is at best crass.

    Don’t get me wrong, school shootings viscerally cut us to the core for the very reason we shouldn’t react. Despite our schools being safer than everywhere else they go, it isn’t absolute safe. Gun violence occurs at .0015% of our schools every year (roughly one out of every 10,000).

  24. K-12 schools, College Campuses, Movie Theatres, Church Basements, yeah, they’re all pretty safe places. I guess you’re right Troy. Nothing to see here. 😉

  25. Statistically speaking billy there not. Chicago on the other hand is no. That gun free zone has real problems.

  26. Dealing with HUD to enhance power efficiency financial investments in subsidized housing
    stock. Division of Farming, Division of Power (DOE), and also Most of the study as well as growth is performed at the National Labs
    as well as together with exclusive business as well as academic organizations.

  27. Both of Ohio’s free-market brain trust continue to
    be essential of the eco-friendly energy mandates Kasich wishes to expand.
    Department of Farming, the U.S. Department of Power (DOE), as well as 9
    At the nationwide degree, a minimum of 30 countries around the globe currently have renewable energy adding greater than 20 % of power supply.

  28. Hi there, I found your site by way oof Google whilst looking for a related topic, your
    site got here up, it seems to be great.I have
    bookmsrked it in my google bookmarks.
    Hello there, simply become aware of your blog via Google, and found that
    it’s really informative. I’m going to be careful for
    brussels. I’ll appreciate if you roceed this in future. Numerous other folks will likely be benefited out of your writing.
    Cheers!

  29. Hello my friend! I wish to say that this post is amazing, great written and
    include almost all significant infos. I would like to look more postrs like this .

  30. She has combined her two loves – journalism and hunting – in her present
    job as editor of California Waterfowl Magazine , and
    she serves on the board of Orion the Hunter’s Institute , an organization that promotes ethical hunting.

Comments are closed.