'Your Voice, Your Vote:' Guns in schools
Washington State Rep. Liz Pike, conservative activist Bob Larimer, Erin Thomas with the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence, and school teacher Drew Persse join KATU's Steve Dunn on Sunday, Jan. 28, 2013 to discuss Pike's proposal to arm teachers with concealed guns to protect students from school shooters. Click on the "Play Video" button to watch the show.
Why would the guns be concealed?  Why not just have the teacher wear a pistol on their hip? Â
The "unintended consequences" of the gun free safe zones has been disastrous.
For those who are thoughtfully considering just how to make school children safe from a murderous intruder, this Connecticut Law Review study has empirical data, actual statistical evidence, footnotes, and it asks questions on both sides of this issue.  But the conclusion is that what we have been trusting to this point has been a ghastly failure:  'Pretend âGun-freeâ School Zones: A Deadly Legal Fiction,'   http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=david_kopel  For the sake of your children and grandchildren, I implore you to review this study, and do some studies on your own.  Emotion-based arguments, low-information special-pleading by anti-gun advocacy groups and other 'experts' have not kept your children safe.  They never can.Please support responsible school district policy changes and state legislation to at least give school personnel a last chance to stay alive and defend the children under their care.Thank YouBob Larimer Â
Way to go Liz Pike! Â My family supports you.
@Drew Persse - training and paying teachers a little more would cost much less than having full-time police officers at schools. Â Additionally, the bad guy wouldn't have the assurance that if they shot the school cop, that they would be free to do as they wished afterwards. Â Some schools would keep the armed cops that they already have in the schools, and some could have at least some or additional protection. Â
Rep. Liz Pike is one of my 18th District Washington State Representatives. With her stance on more guns in schools and teachers to be armed she is definitely NOT representing my wishes. I will not support any legislator who will not consider reasonable gun control. More guns is not the answer. I consider this entire proposal ridiculous and unsafe on many levels.Â
 @Mike Briggs So, you like kids getting shot in schools?  Arguing in favor of protecting our children from criminals and potential felons represents exactly my views.  If my kid is in a school with a shooter, I want to know that my kid has a friend who is at least equally armed willing to protect them from the shooter. Â
@Erin Thomas - It's ok that the licensing isn't standardized from state to state. Â We are worried about our state - not about other states. Â We don't need a one-size-fits-all solution. Â We need a one-size-fits-Washington solution. Â If it works for us, maybe others can adopt the parts (or all) that work for them.
Right now, the only people who have guns in schools are the bad guys and the deranged who do it illegally. Â The ones who want to hurt people have guns regardless of the law. Â Let's protect our children from those people. Â A teacher would be trained just like a police officer or an armed security guard, right? Â If so, I think it's a great idea.
If there is a last chance to save innocent lives once a school shooter accomplishes his goal and confronts helpless children in a school building or classroom, wouldn't people who are truly caring and compassionate agree to give the children the chance to survive?
If government sets gun free zones, making it impossible for law abiding citizens to defend themselves within those zones, and criminals come in and start shooting, shouldn't the government be responsible for violating our constitutional rights?
Â
I seems to me that gun free zones are an infringement upon the 2nd amendment!
Â
It is bad enough when private businesses decide to declare themselves as gun free zones, which is their right. They are privately owned and we do not have to enter their businesses. But when the government demands that our children attend the public schools they should be forced to provide reasonably safe environments at those schools, not make them easy high target areas with low risk for criminals. At the very least due diligence must be made to keep the criminals out of the gun free zones. Negligence is not acceptable and all of those negligence should be held accountable.
Â
Litigation should be taken by anyone that was victimized by illegal shootings in gun free zones to restore the rights of law abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves against the criminals that commit these atrocities!
People who are against this need to freakin think of the consequences of NOT arming our school staff. Listen, with these school shootings in the past - the messed up guys doing this come to the school for ONE purpose. To kill. Now they will find a way inside, and most likely police will NOT be there in time to stop it. What options does that leave? 1000+ unarmed fish in a barrel? That sounds real smart.... Or, we could allow the teachers who WANT to carry each and every day, and train to use their weapons in a hi-stress, crowded area. There are numerous law enforcement agencies as well as private trainers willing to train teachers FOR FREE, the best tactics and techniques they have available to them. I just think the pro's of doing this far outweigh the con's.Â
Â
When my child is old enough to go to school, i will personally go meet his teacher, speak with them, make sure they sound confident in their role if they are carrying while teaching, and thank them for doing so, and leave it at that. That is a WAY better scenario then, "ermagerd, some crazy guy is shooting up classrooms! when are they police coming??! Oh you dont know? Well in the mean time everyone hide!" Yeah...that doesnt work out so well as we have seen in the past...
I grew up (50's and 60's) where we would leave our shotguns and rifles stacked in the back of the classroom for use after school. We did not touch them at all during school but after wards we would take them out into the fields and hunt our way home. This accured from about 4th grade and into high school. Not one problem.
Â
I'd be in favor of equipping teachers with non-lethal means such as rubber bullets, tasers, or beanbag guns. But live rounds in a crowded school? Not a good idea in my opinion.
Our children are, for all practical purposes, are taken into custody by the State, on a daily basis. As Americans we have the RIGHT to bear arms - no infringement allowed - in reality, that DOES NOT EXEMPT our children.  As parents, we are tasked with the defense of our children, as they are generally defenseless on their own.
Â
Constitution of the Great State of Washington: "SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, ...."
Â
The people who wish to act against the right/duty to provide for our children's defense, are pushing against the Washington State Constitution and are acting in violation of the Constitutionally protected rights of the youngest of the INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS OF THE STATE. The police can only arrive after the fact, in too many instances (nothing against the police.)
Â
We the People did NOT delegate powers to the State, for the State to place our children in harm's way.