School System dropped by Insurance for allowing teachers to carry weapons

[shabby 1,960]

Apparently, the insurance company felt it created a riskier environment and wouldn't be cost effective to ensure a school system that allowed teachers to carry weapons. They are right. It's a high stress job and it only takes one crazy teacher to effectively blow up, go off, and create a national headline. As a teacher, I can assure you, there is high pressure and a quite a few unstable teachers. It's a powder keg waiting to blow and this insurance company recognizes that. Guns plus teachers equals really bad idea.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/07/kan-law-thrusts-iowa-insurer-into-gun-debate/2495815/

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

[autigeremt 6,970]

People are supposed to get killed first, Titan! You can't have chaos and reactionary politics if things aren't happening the way you want them too.

[Weegle777 78]

Can't believe that you guys took that bait.

[AUloggerhead 2,356]

Apparently, the insurance company felt it created a riskier environment and wouldn't be cost effective to ensure a school system that allowed teachers to carry weapons. They are right. It's a high stress job and it only takes one crazy teacher to effectively blow up, go off, and create a national headline. As a teacher, I can assure you, there is high pressure and a quite a few unstable teachers. It's a powder keg waiting to blow and this insurance company recognizes that. Guns plus teachers equals really bad idea.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/07/kan-law-thrusts-iowa-insurer-into-gun-debate/2495815/

How often do teachers "blow up, go off, and create a national headline" due to the stress of the job? I can't recall anything in the news like that happening -- except, of course, when they come across a toy gun, drawing of a gun, a piece of paper or a pop tart that approximates the rough outline of a hand gun. Then, I agree with you. Something snaps in them they go bat shyte crazy berserk. An insurance company would be nuts to ensure people that unstable. Smart move, insurance companies!

[TitanTiger 20,708]

If you have a crazy teacher on staff, a rule against having a weapon on campus isn't going to prevent a damn thing...except that when the wacko does lose it and decides to start shooting one day, there won't be a soul on campus that can stop him for several minutes until police can arrive. How many kids and teachers who are sitting ducks do you think a determined gunman can take out in 5 minutes when he or she has no worries about the teacher next door coming over to stop them?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Apparently, the insurance company felt it created a riskier environment and wouldn't be cost effective to ensure a school system that allowed teachers to carry weapons. They are right. It's a high stress job and it only takes one crazy teacher to effectively blow up, go off, and create a national headline. As a teacher, I can assure you, there is high pressure and a quite a few unstable teachers. It's a powder keg waiting to blow and this insurance company recognizes that. Guns plus teachers equals really bad idea.

http://www.usatoday....debate/2495815/

How often do teachers "blow up, go off, and create a national headline" due to the stress of the job? I can't recall anything in the news like that happening -- except, of course, when they come across a toy gun, drawing of a gun, a piece of paper or a pop tart that approximates the rough outline of a hand gun. Then, I agree with you. Something snaps in them they go bat shyte crazy berserk. An insurance company would be nuts to ensure people that unstable. Smart move, insurance companies!

I agree. I think most teachers are off anyhow (LOL)

[TexasTiger 13,559]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

How about a licensed police officer?

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

How about a licensed police officer?

I imagine its more in other parts of the country but right after Sandy Hook our local news asked the school superintendent about that very thing. It would cost about $50,000 a year per school for each licensed police officer. That was about $2 million a year just for a small city like Montgomery that the school budget doesn't contain.

I'd settle for a handful of teachers, at least one every few classrooms or a few on each hallway who are well trained and have thorough background and psych exams given.

[TexasTiger 13,559]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

How about a licensed police officer?

I imagine its more in other parts of the country but right after Sandy Hook our local news asked the school superintendent about that very thing. It would cost about $50,000 a year per school for each licensed police officer. That was about $2 million a year just for a small city like Montgomery that the school budget doesn't contain.

I'd settle for a handful of teachers, at least one every few classrooms or a few on each hallway who are well trained and have thorough background and psych exams given.

The insurance company's policy is that trained police officers are fine. It's not anti-gun, per se. Yes, security comes with a cost. Too bad this isn't a pet project of the Koch brothers.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

How about a licensed police officer?

I imagine its more in other parts of the country but right after Sandy Hook our local news asked the school superintendent about that very thing. It would cost about $50,000 a year per school for each licensed police officer. That was about $2 million a year just for a small city like Montgomery that the school budget doesn't contain.

I'd settle for a handful of teachers, at least one every few classrooms or a few on each hallway who are well trained and have thorough background and psych exams given.

The insurance company's policy is that trained police officers are fine. It's not anti-gun, per se. Yes, security comes with a cost. Too bad this isn't a pet project of the Koch brothers.

Well, I wasn't really addressing the insurance company's decision. That's their right to cover or not cover anything they want. I was more addressing this drivel:

They are right. It's a high stress job and it only takes one crazy teacher to effectively blow up, go off, and create a national headline. As a teacher, I can assure you, there is high pressure and a quite a few unstable teachers. It's a powder keg waiting to blow and this insurance company recognizes that. Guns plus teachers equals really bad idea.

As if the kids are safer with no teacher armed that could stop a shooter, nor a trained officer on campus because they cost so much. Or that somehow a crazy teacher on the verge of losing it and going off will be stopped by some school district policy against having a gun. Poppycock. The kids are sitting ducks.

[TexasTiger 13,559]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

How about a licensed police officer?

I imagine its more in other parts of the country but right after Sandy Hook our local news asked the school superintendent about that very thing. It would cost about $50,000 a year per school for each licensed police officer. That was about $2 million a year just for a small city like Montgomery that the school budget doesn't contain.

I'd settle for a handful of teachers, at least one every few classrooms or a few on each hallway who are well trained and have thorough background and psych exams given.

The insurance company's policy is that trained police officers are fine. It's not anti-gun, per se. Yes, security comes with a cost. Too bad this isn't a pet project of the Koch brothers.

Well, I wasn't really addressing the insurance company's decision. That's their right to cover or not cover anything they want. I was more addressing this drivel:

They are right. It's a high stress job and it only takes one crazy teacher to effectively blow up, go off, and create a national headline. As a teacher, I can assure you, there is high pressure and a quite a few unstable teachers. It's a powder keg waiting to blow and this insurance company recognizes that. Guns plus teachers equals really bad idea.

As if the kids are safer with no teacher armed that could stop a shooter, nor a trained officer on campus because they cost so much. Or that somehow a crazy teacher on the verge of losing it and going off will be stopped by some school district policy against having a gun. Poppycock. The kids are sitting ducks.

I'm not so worried about a crazy teacher. I do think folks with guns in schools not trained in law enforcement are high risk.

[alexava 6,974]

My question is what does the insurance cover? My guess is they are liablr for the actions of the school employees. But are they liable to anyone if outsider like adam lanza busting in. If they are not liable for the later then it's a no brainer to deny guns. If they are liable for both then they have decided armed teachers are riskier than the possibility of a nuttjob attack. I bet their research is more thorough than our opinions.

[homersapien 11,812]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

You remind me of an "All The Family" episode in which Archie's solution to airline hijackings was to hand everyone a gun as they boarded the plane.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

If that were analogous, I would have advocated arming all the students as well.

But I also modified it to say that I don't think all teachers need be armed. Just choose a few and have them go through thorough background checks and psych evals and then extensive training on their weapon of choice and make sure they are positioned throughout the areas of the school. It could be as few as one or two teachers per hallway and maybe someone in the office.

[shabby 1,960]

One teacher accidentally shot himself with the gun he was training to bring to school (sorry no link read it 3 weeks ago)

In my school itself, we had a teacher tackle another teacher during a Christmas party fighting over a $5 present. In our County, a middle school teacher walked down the hallway, stripped off all his clothes screaming I quit. 2 teachers got in a fight over the principal they were both sleeping with. All stories occurred within the last 2 years and are just the ones I'm aware of in one county. There are loonies in every profession and teachers are not immune. Add in the increased pressure of the many different roles they are asked to perform and boom. The difference having weapons readily available makes is allows for an impulsive shooting. Most moments of 'loony behavior' would not result in a shooting if they had to go home and then return with a gun. But imagine if they had that gun when they snapped.

[shabby 1,960]

Another problem with arming teachers is they aren't and never could be trained to a level where they could operate a gun safely among hundreds of fleeing kids in a shooting spree. kids would get caught in the crossfire. Not to mention the danger of kids getting a hold of a weapon not properly stored by a teacher. If a gun is going to be in the hands of someone, it needs to be a trained police officer.

[homersapien 11,812]

Another problem with arming teachers is they aren't and never could be trained to a level where they could operate a gun safely among hundreds of fleeing kids in a shooting spree. kids would get caught in the crossfire. Not to mention the danger of kids getting a hold of a weapon not properly stored by a teacher. If a gun is going to be in the hands of someone, it needs to be a trained police officer.

Well it worked out OK for George Zimmerman.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

One teacher accidentally shot himself with the gun he was training to bring to school (sorry no link read it 3 weeks ago) In my school itself, we had a teacher tackle another teacher during a Christmas party fighting over a $5 present. In our County, a middle school teacher walked down the hallway, stripped off all his clothes screaming I quit. 2 teachers got in a fight over the principal they were both sleeping with. All stories occurred within the last 2 years and are just the ones I'm aware of in one county. There are loonies in every profession and teachers are not immune. Add in the increased pressure of the many different roles they are asked to perform and boom. The difference having weapons readily available makes is allows for an impulsive shooting. Most moments of 'loony behavior' would not result in a shooting if they had to go home and then return with a gun. But imagine if they had that gun when they snapped.

Another problem with arming teachers is they aren't and never could be trained to a level where they could operate a gun safely among hundreds of fleeing kids in a shooting spree. kids would get caught in the crossfire. Not to mention the danger of kids getting a hold of a weapon not properly stored by a teacher. If a gun is going to be in the hands of someone, it needs to be a trained police officer.

Better a couple of kids caught in a crossfire, but many saved than 26 gunned down without a chance because by the time the police arrived, he had 5 minutes of free target shooting with no fear of reprisal. Both are tragic, but at least with some well trained people on campus who are armed you decrease the chances of a large scale killing spree happening. And didn't the lunatic shooter at Sandy Hook have to plan out his attack, load up with weaponry and so on? Doesn't sound like a spur of the moment loony thing to me. Neither did Columbine. Or Virginia Tech.

And you don't even mention the biggest factor...the deterrent factor. Right now, a lunatic shooter knows that if he can get into the school there's no one that can stop him. Unless it's a rich school district that can afford to hire armed security. The poor ones can just take their chances I guess.

[AUcivE09 582]

I think it is a great idea to arm teachers simply because the nutjobs target schools due to easy prey. However, Titan was right earlier in the thread that there are some nutjobs out there. Simply arming a handful of well trained school personnel would have the same effect on detering the cowards that target schools. I know my old HS could not afford an armed security guard. Not to mention potential shooters would know who is armed and know there is only 1 gun. It would be a little different if they knew 5 or 6 armed teachers were around. You may not save every life but you would not lose 26.

[japantiger 4,077]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

You remind me of an "All The Family" episode in which Archie's solution to airline hijackings was to hand everyone a gun as they boarded the plane.

If you remember that, then you also remember that putting armed Air Marshal's on planes is what stopped the rash of hijacking in the 70's. So, having armed personnel in schools makes perfect sense. And this "loony teacher mania" is the same "mania" that says all law-abiding-gun-owning citizens are just ticking time bombs waiting to slaughter us all in schools, theaters, etc., so we must take their guns...And, let me see if I understand the cross-fire logic in the other post. So it's better to have the bad guys shooting at fleeing students, unopposed; than have an armed teacher on the off chance they might hurt a student in a cross fire? Really? I'd be fine with any of the following three proposals: 1) Armed, trained teachers 2) Armed, trained police 3) Armed, trained Mom's volunteering their time...after all, no crazy is going to attack a school with a bunch of Pistol Packing Momma's...no one would defend the kids more forcefully than armed Texas Moms...

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Yes. Much better to give potential gunmen a heads up that any school they go to will be perfect target practice since no one will be armed.

You remind me of an "All The Family" episode in which Archie's solution to airline hijackings was to hand everyone a gun as they boarded the plane.

If you remember that, then you also remember that putting armed Air Marshal's on planes is what stopped the rash of hijacking in the 70's. So, having armed personnel in schools makes perfect sense. And this "loony teacher mania" is the same "mania" that says all law-abiding-gun-owning citizens are just ticking time bombs waiting to slaughter us all in schools, theaters, etc., so we must take their guns...And, let me see if I understand the cross-fire logic in the other post. So it's better to have the bad guys shooting at fleeing students, unopposed; than have an armed teacher on the off chance they might hurt a student in a cross fire? Really? I'd be fine with any of the following three proposals: 1) Armed, trained teachers 2) Armed, trained police 3) Armed, trained Mom's volunteering their time...after all, no crazy is going to attack a school with a bunch of Pistol Packing Momma's...no one would defend the kids more forcefully than armed Texas Moms...

Absolutely true IMHO!!! If teachers can't be trained to shoot a gun how can they be trained to handle any kind of discipline?

[MDM4AU 337]

There are teachers in nearly every school district carrying firearms right now. May be illegal, but it's being done. Been happening for years...and years...