Pepper Spray for teachers???
 

Arming teachers is out for a multitude of reasons - for starters the NEA and every teacher I know is extremely leftwing panicing at mention of firearms. Second pretend the teachers were armed in the scenario that just happened - say eight teachers fired at once, with 6 rounds hitting him, but one of the other 2 rounds killed a student...I can Imagine the lefty lawyers lining up for that one....What about pepper spray canisters - in the confines of the school, the ranges are maybe 25 feet max, pepper spray would not only incapacitate the attacker, but any innocents hit would not suffer any permanent injury....Maybe Im grasping at straws - thoughts?

Train them in using a tazer. Non-lethal, but quite effective.

I know that Ruger is a major pepper spray supplier, Would be awesome for the whole firearms owning community if they stepped forward with a program like this...

Not all us teachers are Huggy-Squeezy liberals. PA is full of gun-loving teachers who would be happy to be able to better protect our students.

Good to hear there are some teachers who think the "right" way - unfortunately in my neck of the woods, MA, or the site of the shooting CT, that would never happen. I just cant see how with the potential for litigation any school district would allow teachers to be armed with guns - just the remote possibilty of an accidental discharge I can easily see at least a million dollar lawsuit...never mind a situation where a student somehow got ahold of the gun

Facing down a dedicated homicidal maniac armed with an array of lethal firearms equipt with a can of pepper spray would qualify you for the Medal of Honor for bravery.. albeit.. awarded posthumously.

One must consider the mindset of the defender..most people have never been under fire. Trained Soldiers are frequently drilled for months and perhaps years to endure the event and sometimes fail when they encounter it. A mild mannered caregiver/teacher is unlikely to provide the defense/offence necessary to find the dusty tazer or cannister, provide adequate cover, locate the attacker and aggressively hit hard enough to stop the attack. The bravery of the Principle at Newtown was extraodinary..apparently she gave it her best effort with her bare hands.

Possibly - but seems to me a pepper spray canister is a hell of a lot more than the teachers had last Friday...

What do you think will become of this? The anti-guns group are already lineing up!

Unless one has heart problems.

At least a ban on new specified semi auto rifles.

Could be a restriction on ammo sales, for example going back to the time when one had to show a driver's license to buy ammo. (Some places already have restrictions for example - like Illinois where you can't buy ammo unless one has a FOID card.)

Possible reclassification of specified semi auto rifles as NFA weapons, like they did to the streetsweeper shotgun some years ago.

MA is same - the concealed permit or shotgun/rifle permit has to be shown to buy ammo. I would not be surprised to see all these military/assault rifles and high capacity pistols become class 3 restricted

In Florida you take a few hour course offered at every gunshow and a background check and a fingerprint card and for a nominal free you are issued a 'CONCEALED WEAPON OR FIREARMS LICENCE' carry a firearm which allows you to buy a firearm on the spot and its good for 7 years. The problem is if your a nutcase within the 7 years those records never seem to make it upstairs. There will be some heated debates before our personal right vanish with the wind. Eric

Interesting - MA concealed permits are good for 6 years for $100.00, the renewal can take up to 3 months. The town PD issuing it explained the length of time is due to mental health history searches..

According to a news report I read, several of the teachers had state carry-concealed permits, but were required by Ct state law [Gun-Free School Zone] to leave them at home...

IMHO, a program for teachers, and other institutions (Post Office, etc), similar to the airline pilots program would be a much more effective way to deal with situations like this...

In a related vein, the Japanese loonies released Ricin gas in a subway, but no one has recommended the ban of chemicals; in Guatamala some years ago, a cane farmer went on a rampage with his machete, but there were no cries for banning machetes; and more examples abound throughout the world & through the years...

One newsman on TV advocated screening individuals for anti-social tendencies...Yeah! Let's do that! Let's set up camps to send them to! :D

It was just on local news here that a discussion to train and arm educational staff in the St Louis city schools will happen. This move has been recommended by the top City cop.

Im sure mass media will try making all of us!

Correction: St Louis County schools...not City.

Most people who CCW, probably shouldn't, no offense to them, but to really defend yourself and others takes years of practice.

Secure rooms and lock-down areas / hallways would be the most effective; yes it could lock folks down at the same time, but then you would have secure rooms in each area.

Just no one expects children to be attacked, so the security has gone to high schools and the like...

Something major is going to happen - in societies eyes the fact that 20 kids aged 6 and 7 are dead is far more egregious than if 20 adults had been killed.

A big deal is being made about security in the schools. But at the two local schools, if one wanted to get at the kids, just wait until school is over and the kids leave. A large number of kids in a mass of kids coming out of the school, heading to the school buses, parent's cars, and those going to walk home. Or go to the Friday night foot ball game, many parents, but even more kids (and adults) all massed in one group, unable to move freely.

I have picked up my two grand kids at their school in Greensburg, PA. Fine - I have a sign I put in the driver's window, I drive up to the door and then the teacher sends the two grandkids out. The next car follows the same system, and so on. The rest are still inside the building. School buses load from three different doors. That has been the system for at least the last 4 years. And they have not had any problems.

A lot of difference between the school there and the two schools here.

On the 9pm news, St Louis County top cop was talking about his idea of arming teachers and he stated, CT was real bad but there is someone else out there right now planning something even bigger. The time involved between entering the school and police showing up is void of any protection if the school does not have a resource officer on duty. That time void needs to be filled with a qualified teacher to stop what's about to happen and that it could be done knowing these shooters are actually afraid of confronting someone with a firearm shooting back.

Now here is what the St Louis Co Dept of Education says, they are against it because...........it would be too dangerous for the children if they got a hold of the gun....DUH!!!!!!!!!:banghead: You can't fix stupid!!!!!

I think the whole thing is a mess. It will take time to sort thinks out!! I hope that we don't jump to conclusions!

Folks,

As an outsider, let me ask you something about the proceedings to buy a firearm in US.
From what I could understand there is a background check when you are buying a gun. But in addition, are there any psicological tests required to buy a gun over here?

As a father of a toddler and having a girl on the way, I was quite shocked with this coward act. Although I'm a supporter of the right to gun ownership but, to be realistic, be sure that you're going to have to deal with new restrictions about gun ownership.

There is no requirement for a medical or psychological report when purchasing a firearm in the US. As long as there is no criminal background or a police report that would preclude a purchase, (domestic violence call, etc.), there is usually no problem in purchasing.
You can never predict how someone might change that dynamic. Thousands lose their gun ownership priviledges each year after a felony conviction or other court ruling. This idiot in Connecticut picked a horrible way to celebrate his first offence.
The liberal left in this country simply hates guns because they believe it gives others power over them and they do not have the strengh or conviction to be responsible for their own safety. Banning semi automatic weapons will solve NOTHING in the long run. It will simply give these shallow thinkers an imaginary peace of mind until the next incident, which will be inevitable unless we attack the root of this problem, which is better medication oversight, better diagnosis and identification of potential threats and, why not? armed teachers and staffs, locked doors and secure areas at schools, just like Israel does today.

Being from Sweden, I'm also kind of an outsider. I do enjoy the liberal gun laws here in the US, but when put in my perspective they are too liberal. I don't think bans on certain guns, registration etc will help a bit, the problem is in the people using the guns so the only logical remedy is to keep the guns out of the wrong hands. This is easier said than done, but one good start would be to introduce some form of license for owning and using firearms, very much like the CCW license. This would not be tied to certain guns, restrict the number or types of guns you can own etc, it would just be a license to shows that you have been properly trained and checked for criminal/mental issues. I'm sure we all agree that people driving cars should have a license and we all know the reason why it should be that way, so a license to own and use firearms should hopefully be seen as a positive thing by most responsible gun owners.

It seems like many of these mass shootings are done by people who shouldn't be able to acquire guns even under the current laws (minors, mentally ill etc) so I still don't know if more laws will help. Still, it's way to easy to check those "not mentally defective" and "not convicted felon" boxes when you buy a gun and the background check is obviously slipping as well, so that part amounts to nothing if nobody follows up on it.

The problem with this, Olle, is that our politicians are famous for never stopping at the reasonable solution. Every time a concession is made on the right, the left never reciprocates and abuses the concession far beyond what was originally agreed upon.

They cannot be trusted, so the only recourse is to oppose them in every way possible.

Sadly, I believe you're right, and every change they have suggested now and in the past has been a poorly conceived knee-jerk reaction, never fully thought out and always in a format that makes it appear like a propaganda stunt rather than an actual solution to the problem.

The sad fact is that many of our politicians don't have a clue, and I'm sure we will see our politicians discussing those evil "machine guns that are made to kill people" again. Then again, there won't be a change if we are opposed to any change, and I believe a discussion between responsible and educated gun owners would be a good way to come up with a solution that really has some effect.

It's a tough nut to crack, but banning assault rifles and restricting magazine capacity sure won't cut it. I see the mass shootings as a symptom of a deeper problem, and just fixing symptoms is never a good solution.

There may not be a Federal requirement for mental health background checks for firearm ownership, but in the State of Massachusetts there is. That is why even the renewal every 6 years takes so long - typically 3 months. As I understand, it is also the reason MA does not recognize other states concealed carry permits, because they do not do any mental illness checks.

Olle.. one good start would be to introduce some form of license for owning and using firearms.

I already have one..it's called the 2nd amendment. Just like I don't need a license to write an article for the newspaper.

I kind of expected that reaction. ;) Really, I don't see a license like what I suggested as a restriction that would affect us in a negative way. See it as a driver's license for guns and you'll see what I mean. The Second Amendment, read by the letter, gives mentally defective, criminals and maybe even children the same right to bear arms, and I don't think anybody would argue that it should be that way. The problem is not the guns, but when guns end up in the wrong hands at the wrong time, you will have a problem.

There are and has to be limits on every amendment- we are all familiar with the fact that yelling FIRE in a crowded movie theater is not free speech. Similarly the Second amendment gives one "the right to keep and bear arms"; by definition nuclear tipped ICBMs are "arms". Im sure these same arguments were put forth in 1934 when the National Firearms Act was voted in.

That's the way I look at it. The Second Amendment is pretty short, and you simply have to see it as "the spirit of the rules", rather than following it to the letter.

Ollie

Is a person who is 15 years old a child ?

When I was 15 I pedaled my bike to the gun store and purchased a 38 cal revolver. Put it in the basket on my bike and pedaled home. No parents. No background check. No license - except cash. I was not the only person that age and younger who purchased pistols. I was late as I did not have the money.

When I was 12, my class in high school started doing close order drill with M1 Garands. (We had a Marine Sergeant ad the PT instructor.) The school yard was next to the Cathedral and the Bishop, priests and those passing by would sometimes watch us. None in my class, those in front of and those behind us ever did anything.

(And we never hurt our thumbs on the Garand.)

My son’s mother-in-law when she was 12 (and all of the girls around her of that age) learned to fire and strip the garand and they also learned how to use the bayonet.

One of my daughter’s war using machine guns (M16) when she was 16. (All US government approved).

The premise of your proposal is not valid.

Read a good article from a pro about the correlation of mass murdering shooters and their drug use (prescription and non). Anabolic steroids are known to cause uncontrolled rage, when combined with Ephedrine and Caffiene (as in most "Energy Drinks") the effect is obviously obvious. Anti-depressants are freely prescribed, and cause a sort-of detached view of reality by their very nature. Chronic, heavy Cannabis users and Alcholics impose their own impulsive issues. ALL of the known shooters in the last few decades were so impaired to some degree.

They ALL have one other thing in common, they are PSYCHOTIC and PARANOID, likely hearing inner voices that don't stop. The last 2 Monsters that rampaged (Oregon and Newton) had one more thing in common, Lanza shot himself upon hearing Police sirens approaching, the Mall Shooter shot himself after the by-stander drew down on him. They are cowards, and want to maintain control to the very end.

My idea (and you saw it here 1st) is PSY-OPs, done covertly of course, with NO media unveiling or ANY public mention to decrease it's potential to feed on the Shooter's paranoid psychosis. Imagine loudspeakers positioned around the perimeter, programed to simulate approaching Police sirens, getting ever louder (from differing directions), finally schreeching to a stop, doors slamming, feet running, loud speakers blaring, even interior speakers with the sound of doors and glass breaking. Gives me chills just thinking about it ... ! This is simple and cheaply done with todays electronics and battery back-up. Remote, inconspicuous key operated panels in all areas provide instant activation by key personnel.

If someone patents this after reading this and makes $$$, don't forget to send my royalty check, heh, heh. :bigbye:

Joe..An excellent idea! I think it has some merit. It would be cheap to implement. Give the perp something to consider while the Police are on their way.

I CAN suggest one major concession that would prohibit approximately 50% of the population from owning these guns:

Prohibit every registered Democrat or admitted left wing liberal from owning these guns.

Now how could they possibly turn this down?

I don't think you are seriously proposing that 15 year old kids should be able to buy guns, but I think understand what you're saying: The real reason for the problem is in today's culture. If you can figure out how this culture has developed, you would also be able to find the solution. However, changing the culture is a daunting task, learning how to handle it is a more viable way. It's not ideal, but at least it's something that can happen within a reasonable period of time.

And if you think of it: The jest of your post is obviously that people need to get familiar with guns and learn to handle them in a responsible way, and this is exactly what I would see out of a license. My son got his first BB gun at 4 and a .22 at 6, and the reason for that was not so much to feed an interest in guns, it was more to teach him responsible gun ownership. If the school system doesn't do it for him, I will, but there's not many parents thinking that way.

Ollie - you came to the major issue in US Supreme court doctrine - do we interpret it literally in the context of the 1787 world where it was written, or do they apply it to todays world. Even in 1787 there were issues - many of the framers who wrote "All Men Are Created Equal" were slave owners.....

That's right. Times are sure changing, and we have to change as well. I would love to go back to the good ol' days when people were tought respect and responsibility, but I don't think I would like to go as far back as 1787. ;)

The question is what we can do and still be reasonably close to what the founding fathers put on paper. Doing nothing and opposing any change is not a solution, unless you're happy with the situation as it is.

I have always thought this is where the Supreme Court could really gut the Second amendment, by simply pointing out that there were restrictions on gun ownership from day 1. When the Constitution became law of the land in 1789, it did not rescind the laws prohibiting slaves from owning firearms. My fear is that someday the left will send a "street smart" Justice to the Supreme Court who has common sense and might figure this out, instead of the "book smart" types they insist on.