PDA

View Full Version : Would you volunteer to guard schools?


nicki
12-23-2012, 8:05 PM
If the state of California would do the following:

Authorize the sheriffs of all counties to place armed citizen volunteers in schools to provide for protection against mass shooters.

In doing so, the volunteers would be allowed to purchase, keep and maintain appropriate arms. Eg, AR 15 rifle with normal cap mags, no bullet button, in other words, a waiver on the AW ban.

Volunteer would be allowed 2 rifles per caliber. My reasoning is a person could get two of the same rifle, use one for heavy duty training and the other as a primary. This is a toe in the doors guys.

The sheriffs would create a training program, it probably would have to be around 16 hours plus because we would have to train to protect students and possibly engage an active shooter.

Volunteers would cover cost, once they got their training, they then would be assigned a school and they would spend say 1 day on a weekend training in that school so they know that school's layout.

After they are trained, then they would perform say 1week of guard duty at a school and we would only do this provided that we could have say 3 to 5 person teams.

People would be allowed to volunteer in any county in the state and applications would be accepted from any US citizen, regardless of state of residence. This would allow people of Nevada, Oregon and Arizona to help with our border counties if they choose.

Please take attached poll. If enough of us show interest, perhaps we could actually make this happen.

At the very least, we could have some pro gun assemblyman introduce the bill if we showed support so that we look like we are doing something.

Yes this is a commitment of our time and money, the other side is waging a full on PR war against us and this is in tune with what the NRA actually proposed.

Anyone who actually does this program can look an anti gunner in the eye and say I am investing my time, money and potentially my life to protect your children, what the **** are you doing?

I figure this would be a one week and say 500 dollar commitment for initial training and then say 1 week per year of school duty and say 4 weekends per year in tactic type training. Say one day for range time and 1 day air soft training in the school.

What do you say Calgunners, any volunteers?

Nicki

Lives_In_Fresno
12-23-2012, 8:12 PM
In California?

Not a chance...The first thing that goes wrong, and you are on the other side of campus, you'll be sued for not stopping it. Alternatively, a shooter who knows a campus has protection might locate/shoot the protector first.

I am also not sure many people could be adequate protection after a 16-hour training program.

Frankly, though, I'm not a good person to ask, because I'm not much in favor of the guards at schools "solution". I think that more work needs to be done to improve society and mental health issues.

TNP'R
12-23-2012, 8:15 PM
I would if I didn't have a job that took up most of my time.

rrr70
12-23-2012, 8:16 PM
Not gonna happen

aklover_91
12-23-2012, 8:29 PM
Absolutely. I'd prefer it be paid because I'm not a saint, but I'd be perfectly happy to do it on a volunteer basis too.

It'd be a worthy use of time even without an AW waiver.

scarville
12-23-2012, 8:35 PM
It's not a bad idea and is an appropriate response to the perceived threat. I am not sure it will be all that useful for such rare events.

jonc
12-23-2012, 8:38 PM
I would if I didn't have a job that took up most of my time.



That's sick!:facepalm:
Very nice

myk
12-23-2012, 9:19 PM
I would, but I need training, though. Even then, I'd be worried about legal repercussions from any "bad people" I might shoot, and whether I would receive assistance in that regard; we all know that if an armed security guard uses their weapon they're on their own, legally...

Grumpyoldretiredcop
12-23-2012, 9:35 PM
Only if performing under a contract with the school district and fully indemnified in the contract by the school district for any and all acts performed under the job description. The district would have to agree to provide independent counsel for me in the event of suit.

How much would you bet on that happening?

M. D. Van Norman
12-23-2012, 9:37 PM
Armed crossing guards (i.e., retirees)? Seriously?

Just let licensed faculty and staff carry and be done with it.

huntercf
12-23-2012, 9:50 PM
Armed crossing guards (i.e., retirees)? Seriously?

Just let licensed faculty and staff carry and be done with it.

^^^This
You might be surprised how many teachers and staff would be willing to carry to protect our kids. I for one would be first in line. Then the bad guys wouldn't know who or how many are carrying on campus. As a teacher it is my solemn duty to protect the students under my care, I just wish I could be allowed to give them better protection than trying to lock my door from the outside and hoping that I don't get shot in the process.

chip3757
12-23-2012, 9:54 PM
We have the watchDOGS program at our school. It's not perfect but its a foot in the door. I agree with granting faculty and teachers permission to carry if they wish, I do not agree with them providing the security at the school. They have enough to worry about just being teachers.

http://www.fathers.com/content/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21&Itemid=60

211275
12-23-2012, 9:55 PM
Let the police do it. You know, the ones you see where it takes 4 squad cars to question some homeless guy on a bike? They are clearly bored and need something to do.

chip3757
12-23-2012, 10:00 PM
Plus, you probably have some schools where 0 teachers or faculty are on site who have even fired a gun, care to fire a gun, or even believe in the 2nd amendment. They are of course the biggest piece of the liberal indoctrination around the country.

strangerdude
12-23-2012, 10:01 PM
Nope! If I wad a parent, I wouldn't want a volunteer with only 16 hours of training guarding my kids school, who is probably itching to get in a gunfight. This idea is crazy.

the donald
12-23-2012, 10:02 PM
a lot of what has been said above. but you face one huge thing. what if the security guard loses it? what if a person planned it, became a "guardian" and committed one of these acts? not likely but then what?

TNP'R
12-23-2012, 10:04 PM
a lot of what has been said above. but you face one huge thing. what if the security guard loses it? what if a person planned it, became a "guardian" and committed one of these acts? not likely but then what?

I hear the same thing from anti gunners, whens the last time you heard of an air marshal losing it and taking down a plane? Or a police officer losing it and just gunning down everyone in sight?

They are wanting former police and military, I'm pretty sure they'll have background checks done.

unusedusername
12-23-2012, 10:06 PM
The main issue with this is that a volunteer position is not paid, and it requires a lot of hours.

This means everyone who signs up to either be independantly wealthy and just bored, or a retiree.

TNP'R
12-23-2012, 10:07 PM
The main issue with this is that a volunteer position is not paid, and it requires a lot of hours.

This means everyone who signs up to either be independantly wealthy and just bored, or a retiree.

Exactly. I have a job, I need that job to live, I can't just quit and volunteer.

Calgunner739
12-23-2012, 10:11 PM
Exactly. I have a job, I need that job to live, I can't just quit and volunteer.

Okay, then don't volunteer. But let others who can and want to donate their time do it and not shoot down the idea just because you cannot do it.

strangerdude
12-23-2012, 10:14 PM
I really wouldn't care if it was former police or former military, a lot of those guys have psych problems. It would only be a matter of time until they start policing the students, which isn't okay with me. I can see the headlines already, " armed volunteer shoots student reaching for his waistband". Would never happen, especially in ca.

Calgunner739
12-23-2012, 10:23 PM
I really wouldn't care if it was former police or former military, a lot of those guys have psych problems. It would only be a matter of time until they start policing the students, which isn't okay with me. I can see the headlines already, " armed volunteer shoots student reaching for his waistband". Would never happen, especially in ca.

That is a concern of mine, the micromanaging the students similar to the BS TSA behavior, along with conditioning more people to a police state. :eek:

forgiven
12-23-2012, 10:37 PM
Yes

nicki
12-23-2012, 10:40 PM
In California?

Not a chance...The first thing that goes wrong, and you are on the other side of campus, you'll be sued for not stopping it. Alternatively, a shooter who knows a campus has protection might locate/shoot the protector first.

I am also not sure many people could be adequate protection after a 16-hour training program.

Frankly, though, I'm not a good person to ask, because I'm not much in favor of the guards at schools "solution". I think that more work needs to be done to improve society and mental health issues.

The big thing for us is it shows us doing something. I say teams of 3 to 5 people so that way we don't have one armed person who will be the first person taken out.

There is no perfect solution, but this is better than what we currently have which is nothing.

Not all sheriffs will do this program, I don't expect the SF sheriff to participate.;)

Of course we need to fix our mental health care system, that is a given and we need to look at society and try to fix what creates these mass killers.

This proposal that I am making is sending a message to the soccer mommies that we in the gun do unity do care about the safety of their children and that we will put ourselves on the line to protect their kids.

When we are protecting their kids, it gives us an chance to discuss why our second amendment rights are so important to preserve a free country.

The issue is more than our self defense rights, the real issue is do we have a government that is still the servant of the people and will we maintain the means to be able to forceably remove a corrupt/tyrannical government if we had to.

Between the war on terror, war on drugs, war on organized crime, the power of our government has grown so much that we now a de-facto police state.

There are many things that can be done, once we step up, then we can shame other parts of society to step up.

This is something I threw out to build on the NRA idea and if we could get some movement, we could show the rest of the country that we are not rolling over and playing dead.

Enough of you have responded positively already that I will contact my assembly person and see if their staff would carry sponsor such a bill.

I expect it to go nowhere, but if we can get it on record, it is a victory.

Nicki

TNP'R
12-23-2012, 10:47 PM
Okay, then don't volunteer. But let others who can and want to donate their time do it and not shoot down the idea just because you cannot do it.
Who said I was shooting down the idea? Not me. Was stating why I can't

theriseofmath
12-23-2012, 10:51 PM
I work in physical security and the company I work for already provides (unarmed) security guards for high schools in the SF bay. If the schools wanted us to provide armed guards the BSIS process for getting an armed guard certification is very stringent but I would have no qualms.

Donk310
12-23-2012, 11:13 PM
No. Nuff said.

GoingPro
12-23-2012, 11:16 PM
downey high school and warren has a police officer during lunch and snack time i think there is on all the time though...i went to downey high the police station is right across the street actually.

JDoe
12-23-2012, 11:18 PM
...Enough of you have responded positively already that I will contact my assembly person and see if their staff would carry sponsor such a bill.

I expect it to go nowhere, but if we can get it on record, it is a victory.

Nicki

Perhaps some market research would be in order? I'm sure that parents might have a thing or two to say about volunteer armed guards at schools. Maybe present some options and see where the parents lead you.


Armed and open carry
Armed and concealed carry
Possibly armed and possibly concealed carry or no carry at all. Just the "threat" of armed personnel dressed like teachers might be enough to convince an active shooter to go to a gun free zone like the food court at the local mall to murder people.


As for the comment regarding volunteers with 16 hours of training just itching to get in a gunfight. I'd rather have someone that is itching to get in a gunfight with the potential murderer of my children than the current situation of unarmed teachers with no training trying to shield my kids with their own bodies.

nicki
12-23-2012, 11:58 PM
Perhaps some market research would be in order? I'm sure that parents might have a thing or two to say about volunteer armed guards at schools. Maybe present some options and see where the parents lead you.


Armed and open carry
Armed and concealed carry
Possibly armed and possibly concealed carry or no carry at all. Just the "threat" of armed personnel dressed like teachers might be enough to convince an active shooter to go to a gun free zone like the food court at the local mall to murder people.


As for the comment regarding volunteers with 16 hours of training just itching to get in a gunfight. I'd rather have someone that is itching to get in a gunfight with the potential murderer of my children than the current situation of unarmed teachers with no training trying to shield my kids with their own bodies.

Before we institute such a program at any school, of course we would have to get parents involved. Most likely the volunteers would come from the community.

Of course we would have to have friendly sheriffs to start with and it would be an opportunity for us to do massive public relations.

If we actually did get this going you can expect that we would have key people from here step up so that we do things right.

Contrary to us being trigger happy, ccw holders across the country have a track record of being trigger responsible.

Imagine a PTA meeting where the volunteers are up on the stage and each just comes up, says a short statement, introduces themselves to the parents.

Anti gunners at this point would who make themselves look like fools if they tried to smear our volunteers.

We have a lot of good people and they will step up if asked.

Nicki

kf6tac
12-24-2012, 4:22 AM
Exactly. I have a job, I need that job to live, I can't just quit and volunteer.

This is hurdle #1 for me. I would need the implementing law to require my employer to treat volunteer time the same as, say, jury duty at a minimum.

Hurdle #2, as some have mentioned, is indemnification. It'd have to be rock-solid so that the state/local government can't weasel out of it if the legal s hits the fan.

Hurdle #3, and this is mostly personal preference, I'd really, really prefer if concealed carry, not open carry, was the order of the day. Even better if participation in the program were mandated by law to constitute good cause for issuance of a LTC, but now I'm just dreaming.

Schlyme
12-24-2012, 4:51 AM
Since I live in A school zone(within 1000' of a school) I would totally volunteer to protect that school! I would be protecting myself as well s all the neighbors kids! I would love this program more so if I would get LEO credentials or I could be able to have off roster pistols as well as standard cap magazines. Yes it would be difficult to make time and pay for training, but I would do the best I could to make it happen.

Hogstir
12-24-2012, 5:25 AM
I think we should use retired Leo's, military etc. They already have the training. Perhaps offer the training programs to returning vets. The job should be a paid position. Get rid of some of the useless bureaucrats at the district level to pay for the positions.

voiceofreason
12-24-2012, 6:30 AM
I'd rather the teachers just be armed if they wanted to be.

I'd volunteer if it was for my grandkids.

SanPedroShooter
12-24-2012, 6:38 AM
Armed crossing guards (i.e., retirees)? Seriously?

Just let licensed faculty and staff carry and be done with it.

Yup.

Flipdude
12-24-2012, 6:59 AM
Yes, I would and the NRA already proposed this with their National School Shield Program which I am supporting in this THREAD (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=662065).

BanjoGunner
12-24-2012, 7:11 AM
Armed crossing guards (i.e., retirees)? Seriously?

Just let licensed faculty and staff carry and be done with it.

I believe this is the best that can be done. I won't call it a solution, because there really isn't one, but it is the best course of action and the one IMO that has the best chance of limiting the number and victims of school shootings.

The big thing for us is it shows us doing something. I say teams of 3 to 5 people so that way we don't have one armed person who will be the first person taken out.

There is no perfect solution, but this is better than what we currently have which is nothing.

/snip.../

These arguments, "We have to do something" and "it's better than nothing", are the exact same arguments that the anti-gun side uses to justify new gun control measures.

Focusing on school safety, and prevention of these exceedingly rare events, is to focus on yet another strawman. The fact is that overall our schools are safe and the occasional rampage by a madman at some random school does not change that. Rare random events, like school shootings, should not be used to drive public policy, either on the anti-, or pro-gun sides. Again, allowing school personnel who desire to carry do so is the best course of action.

henmar77
12-24-2012, 7:11 AM
Not a chance in hell. That's all I need is to get into a gun fight with some metal case and have kids get caught in our crossfire.


Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2

donw
12-24-2012, 7:17 AM
if such a volunteer would be licensed, accredited and certified as a qualified security agent and approved by way of a background check and approved by state DOJ.

IF such a volunteer could, and would, carry concealed...like sky marshals.

think about this: most county sheriffs do NOT have a favorable opinion of NON-LE personnel carrying concealed and most don't favor open carry by anyone but LE.

i do NOT approve of OPEN carry on a school campus...all open carry does is add to the hysteria, paranoia and hyperbole that's openly advocated against firearms by the media now...the current "Public opinion", according to liberal media, is mostly: "Anyone, who's not a cop, or soldier, who has a gun, MUST be a terrorist..."...JMO

dixieD
12-24-2012, 7:24 AM
I would volunteer to CCW carry on my campus

speedrrracer
12-24-2012, 7:27 AM
I think this is a great idea, but as a concept, it's too nuanced to just throw in some volunteers. Some feedback:

I would drop the exemption crap. Walking around a school with an Evil Black Rifle is going to be a non-starter for the .edu crowd.

You probably need to let the NRA or someone drive this idea. Why: Because there's more to guarding kids than just being able to line up your sights. Consider the fact that such shootings are extremely rare, and therefore these volunteers will likely never be judged on their defense of the kids, but on how well they blend into the culture of the school.

A complete program needs to be developed along these lines. That program needs to teach critical skills like when NOT to shoot, which is hopefully 100% of the time. How to not get jacked by gang kids and how to smile / nod at anti-gun teachers who scream in your face that people carrying guns are the Devil and have no place in society. How not to print. How not to get involved in school matters -- your only job is to be ready if some whacko comes through the door shooting -- otherwise, you don't exist.

ETC

Chatterbox
12-24-2012, 7:48 AM
I would do it for my child's school, if I was given an opportunity to work from there (I can do my job remotely).

railgunner
12-24-2012, 8:13 AM
Would be good but I don't think it will happen. I do think there should be safe rooms (bulletproof) in every class room. Would rather have kids in there rather than a broom closet. Something like that would had saved teacher Soto.

Nick5811
12-24-2012, 8:16 AM
I think we should use retired Leo's, military etc. They already have the training. Perhaps offer the training programs to returning vets. The job should be a paid position. Get rid of some of the useless bureaucrats at the district level to pay for the positions.

I like this idea generally. I like the idea of putting vets to work using skill sets they have hard earned and helping reduce un/deremployment. I think putting retired/former cops (in good standing), in addition to the community resource officers which are already at schools in the bay area would be a viable option.

I would have reservations about people who are TOO eager to volunteer for something like this though; the ones that wished with all their might to be police officers so they work in private security and hang out at cop bars (like many serial killers have done).
:oji:
There would be firearms and ammunition suitability concerns (5.56 overpenetration/7.62 barricaded subjects/.45 vs. 9mm etc.). I think being armed with a semi-auto handgun and the ability to have a patrol-type rifle AND shotgun within a short time (1 min?) would be necessary also to ensure the protector has the appropriate tool for the situation at hand (long vs. short range, indoor/outdoor, library vs. gymnasium).

I would do this job if the opportunity presented itself. I'm not sure what kind of payscale would be necessary for this to be a paid job, but I think you'd find a fair amount of qualified applicants at around $25/hr ($60k/yr) in my area (your area may vary). This could be accomplished by a funds-matching program of some sort, like $1 from the feds, $1 from the state, $1 from the school district or something similar). In this case, I would argue that we'll "get what we pay for".

The training to engage an active shooter would need to be closer to a minimum of 40 hours for someone that already has a basic understanding of armed confrontation/use of force/weapons handling. More training=less liability=more likely to happen in my opinion.

You wouldn't *need* 3-5 people if they were properly trained (minimum team of 2 is current guidance), but of course the more the merrier. There would be a lot of kinks to iron out, but a proposal like this isn't the worst option I've heard. Probably more effective than a metal detector with a single security guard at a single main access point.

end :oji:

guntrust
12-24-2012, 8:28 AM
I'll volunteer for my kid's private school, and i support the right for other parents to do the same.

daveinwoodland
12-24-2012, 8:33 AM
May of already been said, but for this to work in the best way possible it would have to be like a Sky Marshall set up, where no one would know who was armed. This IMO is much more of a deterent then being able to know who has a gun and who doesn't.

CSACANNONEER
12-24-2012, 8:35 AM
I feel that the kids would be safer with unidentified armed teachers. I'd rather send my sister, a public school kindergarten teacher) a case of practise ammo for her gun than have anyone become a primary target.

StanCo
12-24-2012, 8:40 AM
Talk about a mind numbing volunteer job. Just imagine hanging around a school all day waiting for a bad guy that will never show up. No thanks!

glbtrottr
12-24-2012, 8:46 AM
Will never happen.

Any job or volunteer that takes away from anything that could be done by law enforcement will be vehemently opposed by police unions. Pensions hold far too much sway.

Retired LEOs and military have far better things to do with their time after 25-30 years than to go back into the suck. They just got done spending years playing that role; most would never want to go play kiddy babysitter at some school waiting for the monster to arrive just because women and children are afraid; the job of law enforcement is reactive: hook them, book them, clean up. They wouldn't work for the pay cut or loss of status. Extra scratch? Sure. Not for volunteerism by and large. Security guard duty sucks, and a Sheriff who played jAiler doesn't want to play the "what if" game at your school, in my opinion.

The desperate housewives of California aren't Interested in listening to new ideas when letting "even one more gun" on the street by way of a school security guard getting in the hands of a criminal is one too many. The irrational absolutism of most of that voting block having a reactive response to gun fear is just too powerful to overcome.

Great idea? Sure.

The legislators are too entitled and cynical. It simply won't happen.

Flipdude
12-24-2012, 9:55 AM
May of already been said, but for this to work in the best way possible it would have to be like a Sky Marshall set up, where no one would know who was armed. This IMO is much more of a deterent then being able to know who has a gun and who doesn't.

I agree, CCW would be the best way to go about this.

allpoint
12-24-2012, 10:14 AM
I think we should use retired Leo's, military etc. They already have the training. Perhaps offer the training programs to returning vets. The job should be a paid position. Get rid of some of the useless bureaucrats at the district level to pay for the positions.
THIS! Most sense.

bigcalidave
12-24-2012, 11:57 AM
No, and rifles? No way. Having two armed (concealed) and properly trained people on campus, unknown to the general public, working as staff, coaches, teachers, etc is the way to go. Two so that there would always be at least one on campus in case of sickness, lunch breaks, etc. I think the NRA is really on the right path, and will be developing a similar strategy in their school shield program. Preferably training teachers or staff already on campus, but bringing in outsiders if they can't find anyone to work with and integrating them.

DannyInSoCal
12-24-2012, 12:02 PM
I already volunteer at my local elementary school to assist kids that need help reading.

I'd gladly do it carrying concealed...

tzotzo
12-24-2012, 12:21 PM
as someone who has taken some (not nearly enough I learned) excellent defensive handgun programs, I realize that myself protecting a school with firearms will be challenging and should require more training than the average police has. It can be done, but it's not just about walking around with a Glock on the hip.

But because it would be challenging to do it 100% effectively doesn't mean we shouldn't try RIGHT NOW.

TURBOELKY
12-24-2012, 12:27 PM
I would gladly spend my every Monday off my normal job, providing armed, or un armed security to an elementary school. Especially my sons school. I'd put my life on the line for children any day. I could care less how boring it would be.

SFgiants105
12-24-2012, 12:29 PM
I am not sure it will be all that useful for such rare events.

No it will not.

While I would be livid if another AWB passed, guards at elementary schools with AR-15s isn't going to help. I feel like every school could have a single police officer assigned to it, just like at high schools; you could easily have some rookie/about-to-retire cop posted at every elementary and middle school. I remember that the cop at my high school, Sergeant Baker, was on the SWAT team in our county (this was in San Ramon); I remember one day he walked out of the main office with a belt of .308 slung over his shoulder :D

IMO, LaPierre should not have said that we need armed guards at our elementary schools; as if all the Democrats don't think gun owners are loonies already, he had to go say some stupid 5h!t like that.

This is what Israelis had to say about his comment on their having armed guards at schools:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/israelis-shoot-nra-claim-article-1.1226401

“There is no comparison between maniacs with psychological problems opening fire at random to kill innocent people and trained terrorists trying to murder Israeli children,”

What LaPierre said about maniacs choosing schools because the are soft targets is a valid claim. Another valid claim is that an AWB would not have necessarily helped the children at Sandy Hook; when I saw them talking about the AR-15 on the news in relation to the story, all I could help thinking was that it had nothing to do with what kind of weapon he had. An AR-15 with a 30 round mag is no different to an unarmed Kindergarten teacher than a Ruger 10/22; a man with with a gun is a man with a gun.

Here are some instances of people wreaking havoc in schools, most without AR-15s:

http://listverse.com/2008/01/01/top-10-worst-school-massacres/

Particularly, #10 (homemade flamethrower; killed 11, injured 22) and #6 (2 .357 mags and 2 9mm; killed 18). As you can see from the Dublane massacre, the shock and fear created from the incident was enough to lead to the UK banning guns altogether. IMO, I don't think a bullet button and 10rd mag would have stopped Adam Lanza from killing as many of those children as he did; it's not as if in between a reload some 1st grade teacher would overpower him and take the gun away. Also, it's worth noting he had two pistols on him which he didn't use (at least not that I know of).

LaPierre's statement "The only thing that will stop a bad guy with gun is a good guy with a gun" is probably perceived by the anti-gun demographic as an illegitimate statement, however when you live in a world that legitimizes the use of violence (via military and police) to instill order, removing the right from an individual to protect him/herself with the use of violence is hypocrisy at the highest level.

Claiming that only the military should have "military style guns" is ridiculous. I'd like to see how far a US military force equipped with only semi-automatic 5.56 rifles (so no explosives, no air or naval support, no artillery) would fair against even the lowest budget armies.

lilro
12-24-2012, 12:31 PM
I'd prefer people who were not prohibited persons being allowed to carry on school grounds, rather than making a job/volunteer position out of it.

therealnickb
12-24-2012, 12:37 PM
What do you say Calgunners, any volunteers?

Nicki

I would do it in a heart beat with only a few basic conditions. (don't need any special treatment or perks)

No uniform and the "appearance" of some reason to be there besides security.

CC only.

StratORcaster
12-24-2012, 12:41 PM
What's the liability per stray round in a self defense situation? Last I heard it was 1.2 mil. On a school campus? No thanks.

1911su16b870
12-24-2012, 12:47 PM
I have and will gladly again.

kbenson
12-24-2012, 12:59 PM
As a few of u have mentioned- The guard would probably be eliminated 1st, be too far away, have to deal with a possibility of human shields.

What needs to happen-

*Train and equip a few school staff members with tasers and or mace.
*Run school drills (what to do if a nut enters campus)
*provide metal detectors and ensure visitors have only 1-2 entry points to school (doors in this area are electronically locked/unlocked)

I would volunteer (but not carry a firearm) just a taser, disposable cuffs + mace. My primary responsibility would be to evacuate children/staff from danger zone and then deal with nut.

BTW OPs idea is not too far fetched- They do allow citizens to patrol the mex border.

JDoe
12-24-2012, 2:04 PM
As a few of u have mentioned- The guard would probably be eliminated 1st, be too far away, have to deal with a possibility of human shields.

The "guard" should be indistinguishable from teachers or any other staff member. The police already have policies and procedures for dealing with an active shooter using human shields. There is no reason why any normal person couldn't be taught the same and receive training that would be better than your average cop.

*Train and equip a few school staff members with tasers and or mace.
*Run school drills (what to do if a nut enters campus)
*provide metal detectors and ensure visitors have only 1-2 entry points to school (doors in this area are electronically locked/unlocked).

Tasers and Mace can be defeated very, very easily. Using metal detectors and one or two access points only creates a bottleneck and if the person manning the access point isn't armed or protected the active shooter will just shoot that person first. What will the person manning the access point do if an active shooter starts shooting children as they bunch up around the access point?

therealnickb
12-24-2012, 2:12 PM
What's the liability per stray round in a self defense situation? Last I heard it was 1.2 mil. On a school campus? No thanks.

What's the liability of losing 18 kids?

StratORcaster
12-24-2012, 2:18 PM
What's the liability of losing 18 kids?

....that you accidentally hit? Man, you need to head to the range! :D

I have kids and hear you. It's a lot of liability to place on a volunteer. That's my point.

nicki
12-24-2012, 4:41 PM
So far 1000 plus have viewed the thread, out of the thousand who have viewed the thread, 10 percent actually took the poll.

80 percent of those who took the poll said they would volunteer.

To cover a school for 181 school days, figure say 40 weeks with 4 volunteers committing say 5 days per year on average, we would need 160 volunteers per school.

While this is a big task, it is something that can be done. People will step up if asked and we will probably find that as things ramp up, more parents will step up.

When little Johnny asked Daddy how come he doesn't patrol the school to protect him, Daddy will be shamed into action.

I got my mom to stop smoking when I was 10 when I walked up to her and pouted about how she was going to die of cancer and leave me all by myself.

I finally got braces myself when my daughter wanted to get braces and she said to me, "you should get braces to, we can do this together".;)

For all the naysayers here, something I would like you to seriously consider.

We have a higher chance of winning the California lottery than having a school shooting with mass casualties at any school will implement this program.

If a mass school shooting happens at any school that doesn't have our school protection plan in place because they turned it down will have parents turned on the school administrators, not us for a change.

Our opponents may have the media, but they don't have the grassroots because they don't have people.

Is there a ban guns forum of any significant size anywhere in the country?

They are so paranoid, they can't even build a facebook group because anytime someone dares post a simple comment that might question what they are doing, they ban them.

Even if they did have an organization, what could they offer for school protection, a bunch of volunteers who chant and blow whistles?

Communities have taken up arms to defend themselves in times of civil unrest or natural disaster and considering that the ground shakes in this state, one side benefit is our school guards would be a in place community resource should we have a natural disaster such as a 9.0 earthquake to help restore and maintain public order while we rebuild our communities.

Nicki

potter
12-24-2012, 5:57 PM
I'm old, poor and disabled. I need some gardening done. Would someone please volunteer? You can wear your gun.

CCWFacts
12-24-2012, 6:09 PM
No, I would not do it. It's an utter and absolute waste of time, and it will actually COST lives.

Yes really.

There are about 100,000 schools in the US. Let's say that one guy has to drive three miles each way (six miles a day) to each of these schools every day to do guard duty.

That's a total of 600,000 miles a day of driving, or about 120 million miles per year (depending on how many days school is in).

A quick search shows this as the rate of fatal accidents when driving:

Its 2008 Traffic Safety Facts Data boils down the millions of accidents and other statistics to 1.27 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled

Put these figures together, and having school guards show up to guard every one of the 100,000 schools in the US will result in roughly 2 traffic fatalities per year.

That's probably approximately the number of mass shooting at school deaths per year.

And I'm not confident that one volunteer guard somewhere on a school campus is going to make a significant impact. Most schools have dozens of rooms and are somewhat spread out, and how much training and efficacy are these volunteer guards going to have? I'm sure they'll help some, but will they help enough to offset the two lives a year they will lose in additional traffic accidents? I doubt it.

This whole concept was is a really dumb idea. Throwing huge resources at stopping very rare problems is a classic case of humans not being able to do math when the issue is emotional.

(One factor that could affect my math is that people who do volunteer for this will probably skew towards mature people with high levels of personal responsibility, who are probably also safer than average drivers, but still, this whole idea is really dumb.)

dustoff31
12-24-2012, 6:28 PM
If the state of California would do the following:

Authorize the sheriffs of all counties to place armed citizen volunteers in schools to provide for protection against mass shooters.

In doing so, the volunteers would be allowed to purchase, keep and maintain appropriate arms. Eg, AR 15 rifle with normal cap mags, no bullet button, in other words, a waiver on the AW ban.

Volunteer would be allowed 2 rifles per caliber. My reasoning is a person could get two of the same rifle, use one for heavy duty training and the other as a primary. This is a toe in the doors guys.

The sheriffs would create a training program, it probably would have to be around 16 hours plus because we would have to train to protect students and possibly engage an active shooter.

Volunteers would cover cost, once they got their training, they then would be assigned a school and they would spend say 1 day on a weekend training in that school so they know that school's layout.

After they are trained, then they would perform say 1week of guard duty at a school and we would only do this provided that we could have say 3 to 5 person teams.

People would be allowed to volunteer in any county in the state and applications would be accepted from any US citizen, regardless of state of residence. This would allow people of Nevada, Oregon and Arizona to help with our border counties if they choose.

Please take attached poll. If enough of us show interest, perhaps we could actually make this happen.

At the very least, we could have some pro gun assemblyman introduce the bill if we showed support so that we look like we are doing something.

Yes this is a commitment of our time and money, the other side is waging a full on PR war against us and this is in tune with what the NRA actually proposed.

Anyone who actually does this program can look an anti gunner in the eye and say I am investing my time, money and potentially my life to protect your children, what the **** are you doing?

I figure this would be a one week and say 500 dollar commitment for initial training and then say 1 week per year of school duty and say 4 weekends per year in tactic type training. Say one day for range time and 1 day air soft training in the school.

What do you say Calgunners, any volunteers?

Nicki

Most of what you propose is already a matter of CA law. It was passed in 1998. You can see how interested schools are in implementing such a plan.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/97-98/bill/sen/sb_1601-1650/sb_1626_bill_19980923_chaptered.html

SEC. 2. Section 35021.5 of the Education Code is amended to read:

35021.5. (a) The governing board of a school district may establish an unpaid volunteer school police reserve officer corps to supplement a police department established pursuant to Section 38000.
Any person deputized by a school district as a school police reserve officer shall complete the training prescribed by Section 832.2 of the Penal Code.

(b) It is the intent of the Legislature to allow school districts to use volunteer school police reserve officers to the extent necessary to provide a safe and secure school environment.

SEC. 3. Section 38001.5 is added to the Education Code, to read:
38001.5. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature to ensure the safety of pupils, staff, and the public on or near California's public schools, by providing school security officers with training that will enable them to deal with the increasingly diverse and dangerous situations they encounter.
(b) After July 1, 2000, every school security officer employed by a school district who works more than 20 hours a week as a school security officer shall complete a course of training developed no later than July 1, 1999, by the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services of the Department of Consumer Affairs in consultation with the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training pursuant to Section 7583.31 of the Business and Professions Code. If any school security officer subject to the requirements of this subdivision is required to carry a firearm while performing his or her duties, that school security officer shall additionally satisfy the training requirements of Section 832 of the Penal Code.

nicki
12-24-2012, 6:47 PM
Most of what you propose is already a matter of CA law. It was passed in 1998. You can see how interested schools are in implementing such a plan.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/97-98/bill/sen/sb_1601-1650/sb_1626_bill_19980923_chaptered.html

Well, if we already got a working model already in place, then we can go ahead.

My concern with arms is that many shooters were some level of body armor which is why I want them to have both a handgun and a rifle.

At this time, this is just an idea I floated to get a feel and go from there. If there is interest, I am sure someone far more qualified than me will step up to take the lead.;)



Nicki

dustoff31
12-24-2012, 6:51 PM
Well, if we already got a working model already in place, then we can go ahead.

My concern with arms is that many shooters were some level of body armor which is why I want them to have both a handgun and a rifle.

At this time, this is just an idea I floated to get a feel and go from there. If there is interest, I am sure someone far more qualified than me will step up to take the lead.;)



Nicki

Well, now is certainly the time to move on it, I would think. If they aren't going to do anything with it now, they never will.

GREASY357
12-24-2012, 7:08 PM
Guards are not the way to go. If I had a child I wouldn't want him/ her in a school looking like a prison. Guards would also take away from the schools budget. Trained teachers and faculty concealing is the way to go. How I see it anyways

GREASY357
12-24-2012, 7:12 PM
oh sorry... "volunteer"

Lives_In_Fresno
12-24-2012, 7:51 PM
We have a higher chance of winning the California lottery than having a school shooting with mass casualties at any school will implement this program.


I can appreciate that you have opinions, but please label them as such. There simply is no data supporting any contention that putting armed volunteers at a school will (substantially/measurably) lower the likelihood of that school being involved in a mass casualty situation that the armed guard is there to assist with.

Dutch3
12-24-2012, 8:01 PM
I would do it, since I already work in an elementary district in a non-teaching position. I'm there every day anyway.

nicki
12-24-2012, 9:24 PM
I can appreciate that you have opinions, but please label them as such. There simply is no data supporting any contention that putting armed volunteers at a school will (substantially/measurably) lower the likelihood of that school being involved in a mass casualty situation that the armed guard of there to assist with.

The real issue is that mass casualty shootings are rare, this is why the media is going into such a hysteria to scare the population into a frenzy to ban our guns.

There can't be data to support this idea because it is such a rare happening, the problem is the public has been scared witless and they are in an emotional frenzy to ban guns.

Even if we had that facts to prove what we want to do will work, who would here it.

This is a proposal to go that appeals to the gut. The facts are that when there is an active shooter, every minute he is not engaged, one more victim dies.

The only way to keep the carnage down on schools or any other place is to get an armed counter response to the scene as quickly as possible.

The only way that will happen on a school ground is if people are already there and the truth is if we have people there, the likely hood that we will have a mass shooting will drop drastically.

There is a reason mass shootings happen in "gun free" or what I called "victim disarmed" zones.

This is not a be all and end all solution, it is a start and we need to fill in and go on the "offense" against things that create such shooters in the first place.

When parents see that we are protecting their children and we ask them to help us change social, cultural and political to protect their children, they will step up.

Nicki

Meplat
12-24-2012, 9:30 PM
In California?

Not a chance...The first thing that goes wrong, and you are on the other side of campus, you'll be sued for not stopping it. Alternatively, a shooter who knows a campus has protection might locate/shoot the protector first.

I am also not sure many people could be adequate protection after a 16-hour training program.

Frankly, though, I'm not a good person to ask, because I'm not much in favor of the guards at schools "solution". I think that more work needs to be done to improve society and mental health issues.

Formal designated guards are just targets. Allow school employees who have CCW’s to carry on campus. And make ‘school employee’ good cause in every county in the state.

ClarenceBoddicker
12-24-2012, 11:49 PM
No.

Modern public schools are taxpayer funded socialist indoctrination centers that brain wash minors with stuff like lies about the 2A. They are also huge taxpayer make work projects, with minimal or no accountability for far too many public employees. The union spawned from those public employees is the enemy of all lawful firearms owners in CA. IMO, the best thing that can be done is to get rid of all taxpayer funded public schools. Parents should take individual responsibility & not mooch off other taxpayers who don't have children or the ones that properly send them to private schools or better yet home school them. If you can't afford (including paying for their schooling) children, then just don't have them.

therealnickb
12-25-2012, 7:13 AM
....that you accidentally hit? Man, you need to head to the range! :D

I have kids and hear you. It's a lot of liability to place on a volunteer. That's my point.

The school already faces the liability. A competent volunteer wouldn't increase it IMO.

I'm not advocating anyone be forced to do it. And I'd sure want a qualification process for anyone willing to take on the roll as I wrote before.

If you carry now, you've already assumed a huge potential for liability. That's my point.

Getting the antis to see gun free zones as a major part of the problem is the challenge. That's why I ask them if losing 10 kids is an acceptable solution.

Bullwhip55
12-25-2012, 7:42 AM
I think more bad senerios come out of this than good ones, I vote leave it up to the police.

Mr Blu
12-25-2012, 8:15 AM
No.

Modern public schools are taxpayer funded socialist indoctrination centers that brain wash minors with stuff like lies about the 2A. They are also huge taxpayer make work projects, with minimal or no accountability for far too many public employees. The union spawned from those public employees is the enemy of all lawful firearms owners in CA. IMO, the best thing that can be done is to get rid of all taxpayer funded public schools. Parents should take individual responsibility & not mooch off other taxpayers who don't have children or the ones that properly send them to private schools or better yet home school them. If you can't afford (including paying for their schooling) children, then just don't have them.

That whole statement is a hasty generalization fallacy. Period. You have no evidence to back up that claim, nor do you have the knowledge that ALL schools are that way, as that would require YOU to have been to every school across the US.

I doubt that has happened.

/off soap box

Ahem.....to the OP.

A 100% legit/airtight legal defense/contract would have to be in place, as many people of the anti-2A camp would see this as an opportunity to ban more guns, should something go wrong.

I would volunteer, as I am not only a veteran, but an infantryman who has seen combat. No better training environment than war on how to properly use a firearm. Additional training involving the campuses would be required. Somewhere around the 40-60 hour range.

The background checks/training would have to be very stringent to do 2 things.
1) Ensure proper training
2) Filter the wannabe Wyatt Earps of the area out of the program.

CCW is the ONLY way to go, on top of some "legitimate" reason for the person to be there, as some form of cover. Gym teacher assistant, low level faculty, etc. Something low level, so as to not take up major responsibilities that could "distract" the volunteer, and also be easily invisible to the staff themselves.

Flipdude
12-25-2012, 6:25 PM
If anything will come out of this, it would be a county sheriff's decision to consider approving a CCW for teachers/faculty and concerned parents (fingers crossed). I'm just worried about another Trayvon Martin case popping up because of this.

therealnickb
12-25-2012, 8:18 PM
I'm just worried about another Trayvon Martin case popping up because of this.

You shouldn't be....

therealnickb
12-25-2012, 8:22 PM
I think more bad senerios come out of this than good ones, I vote leave it up to the police.

Maybe clarify?

"Come out of" what?

"Leave" what up to the police?

Bobby Hated
12-25-2012, 10:17 PM
im a grad student and adjunct instructor and i would be more than happy to CCW on campus. too bad i teach summer school at NYU. ha ha ha.

**** bloomberg and the old MAIG's!!

Dutch3
12-26-2012, 4:16 AM
On the subject of liability, what if a school district has the opportunity to implement such a program, but chooses not to? If something bad happens, will the district be on the hook for failing to act?

For example, some organization presents a comprehensive plan to the school board that would provide increased security on campus. Part of the plan includes armed individuals at the schools. It wouldn't necessarily have to be the NRA "School Shield" plan, but perhaps from the local PD, Sheriff or even the PTA.

Say the costs are partially or largely covered by safety grant money, volunteer time, etc., and present a minimal cost to the schools. If the district says, "Thanks, but we are not interested", will that leave them open to charges of negligence should a tragedy occur?

Interested in your thoughts.

therealnickb
12-26-2012, 5:15 AM
At the end of the day it won't matter much IMO. If you have a tragedy and kids die, the lawyers show up and somebody pays.

The idea is to keep kids from dying. No solution I've heard from the antis does that.

Hogstir
12-26-2012, 6:20 AM
It's going to take more than armed guards. A lot of schools are wide open where the perp could enter at multiple locations. Close the schools off so that after school starts all visitors must enter through one location and place the armed security there. All the high schools in our district have always had a police officer stationed on campus and the patrol car visible at the office.

YORCHI117
12-26-2012, 6:27 AM
If I could CCW carry at my kids school I would volunteer a lot more, even if it was just to sell raffle tickets outside. I could help with recess or anything they'd want me to do.

I wouldn't want to 'guard' my kids school even though I'm a Marine because I never want to see my kids school turning into a place that's fortified and stuff like that. I want my daughter to go to school and just have fun being a kid without having to worry. I'd fear that if she and the other kids saw guards outside it would either desensitize them or scare them.

So while I wouldn't be guarding it, like in the Marine sense of the word, I would be there willing to protect...actually I'm going to just start doing that more often, even without the CCW

Hopalong
12-26-2012, 6:27 AM
In house CCW.

Outsiders would appear a little too Ramboesque to me.

Plus, I believe there may be insurance/ liability issues with outsiders

Lives_In_Fresno
12-26-2012, 6:37 AM
There is a reason mass shootings happen in "gun free" or what I called "victim disarmed" zones.


You are likely reading too much into this one event. Mass casualty events are not just at schools ("victim disarmed zones"). It might just be that there are lots of people expected to be in the chosen location...

I guess we need to also volunteer at local malls?

therealnickb
12-26-2012, 7:04 AM
You are likely reading too much into this one event. Mass casualty events are not just at schools ("victim disarmed zones"). It might just be that there are lots of people expected to be in the chosen location...

I guess we need to also volunteer at local malls?

Columbine, VT, Aurora, Oregon, Newtown. All gun free zones right?

nicki
12-26-2012, 9:21 AM
You are likely reading too much into this one event. Mass casualty events are not just at schools ("victim disarmed zones"). It might just be that there are lots of people expected to be in the chosen location...

I guess we need to also volunteer at local malls?

Seems like the mall shootings happened in gun free zones also. Of course that fix is simple, all the malls have to do is change their policies.

If businesses don't want patrons to be able to defend themselves, then they should screen all people entering the mall for weapons and have a armed security force in case their security is breeched.

Friend of mine who does some dept of homeland security work in Wash DC says that gatherings of 200 plus people are labeled as potential terrorist targets for mass casualties.

We need volunteers at schools because our children can't defend themselves.
At the malls, adults can fiend for themselves with ccw permits.

BTW, both Frenso Sheriffs and Fresno PD are issuing CCW permits, so you are in an area where you do have the option of getting a CCW now.;)

Nicki

FoxTrot87
12-26-2012, 10:16 AM
Obama cut School Resource Officer (SRO) aka Police on Campus funding to back his 2008 contributors' energy programs.

List of Failed Green Energy Programs left on our Tab (includes total cost)
http://www.dividedstates.com/list-of-failed-obama-green-energy-solar-companies/

School Resource Funding Sunset (guess which school used to have a cop on campus?)
http://www.washingtonguardian.com/washingtons-school-security-failure

Nick5811
12-28-2012, 4:45 AM
I wouldn't want to 'guard' my kids school even though I'm a Marine because I never want to see my kids school turning into a place that's fortified and stuff like that. I want my daughter to go to school and just have fun being a kid without having to worry. I'd fear that if she and the other kids saw guards outside it would either desensitize them or scare them.

So while I wouldn't be guarding it, like in the Marine sense of the word, I would be there willing to protect...actually I'm going to just start doing that more often, even without the CCW

I agree with you here; forcing our lifestyle to mimic those in the middle east, or even Japan, France or the UK would mean that to some extent the terrorists are winning/have won. I am of course referring to vans full of police/military commandoes parked every few blocks waiting to "fill" for the gunless police officers should the case arise, or the middle east's constant armed conflict and violence by and on their own people.


Seems like the mall shootings happened in gun free zones also. Of course that fix is simple, all the malls have to do is change their policies.

We need volunteers at schools because our children can't defend themselves.
At the malls, adults can fiend for themselves with ccw permits.

Nicki

The option not mentioned here (and of course, not condoned by me or anyone on this board etc.) is a very real option: ignoring the gun free zone.

Anyone with a CCW or other authorized ability to carry can simply plead ignorance of the 'gun free zone' where not statutorily prohibited. Not every GFZ has uniformly designed, clearly posted signs in prominent places establishing such areas as "gun free zones". The idea of CCW is that NOBODY KNOWS YOU ARE CARRYING; if you do it right, nobody will ever know unless you HAVE to use it.

At that time, your actions will put you in the 'judged by 12' rather than 'carried by 6' group, which so many people purport to want to be part of. Sure, you'll take some heat from having the firearm in the GFZ just like the real criminals do, but as long as the shooting of a mass killer was a justifiable homicide, you shouldn't be in TOO much trouble (isn't the first violation of CCW law a misdemeanor anyways?). If I was on the jury, I'd vote to let you go under these conditions...

Of course, we're not talking about a school here, since EVERYONE knows you can't carry a gun within a mile of a school or something ridiculous like that...just in case it decides to jump out of it's holster and start spraying bullets everywhere all by itself.

adrenaline
12-28-2012, 5:40 AM
May of already been said, but for this to work in the best way possible it would have to be like a Sky Marshall set up, where no one would know who was armed. This IMO is much more of a deterent then being able to know who has a gun and who doesn't.This. I'd add the ability to get access to Level III armor and a semi-auto rifle if they assess the situation and realize the threat requires it (in some kind of security room).

Definitely CCW to start though.

If some schools choose to NOT arm themselves, they can benefit from the schools that do. Kind of like having sign in front of your house saying you are armed and your neighbors aren't. Removing the sign and having a 2nd amendment in place actually serves the anti-gun family next door as a criminal is always wondering if he hit the right place or not.

Put a sign up...and the guessing game is over.

DvlFig
12-28-2012, 8:48 AM
I'd do it :)