Journal damn_registrars's Journal: The "Armed School Security Guard" Question Again 73
I replied to a recent front page article by asking that we consider starting to hold gun owners more responsible for what happens with their weapons when they are not responsible with them. Perhaps because I posted it rather late, that comment pulled in only 4 replies (unsurprisingly none of which were in support). One in particular brought up the conservative meme of putting armed security guards in schools.
Previously I thought that this suggestion was just short-sighted conservatism. It occurred to me though in further inspection that this is likely something more significant. I suspect that this comes up not as an attempt to protect the children, but rather as an attempt to end public education as we know it.
How could that be? It's rather simple, really. Let's say that an armed security guard is paid ~$50k/year. Note that entry-level school teachers make significantly less than that. I've never heard anyone suggest that one guard would be sufficient, they really need to come in pairs if you want them to stop an armed intruder, right? Hence you're already looking at $100k/year for one school. Though how many schools have only one set of doors? Every school I went to had at least three sets of doors through which someone could enter - the front (main) doors, a side door closer to the parking lot, and the third door for outdoor activities for the students to enter and leave through. Now you need a pair of guards at each door; you're looking at $300k/year for each school. High schools often have even more entrances, you could easily surpass $500k/year for guards there.
Yet who will pay for this? The schools can't raise money for it. My sons are in a well-funded district but they are still asked to bring tissues at the start of the year as the school can't afford to supply them. Tissues, to blow their fucking noses into when they aren't feeling well! So now we're talking about laying off 6-8 teachers per school to pay for armed guards, which will of course increase class sizes.
And don't pretend that this can be done by volunteers. Who has time and competency to do this for free? Do you really want kids defended by retirees carrying semi-automatic weapons? Of course not.
What I find interesting about this though is that the people who are trying to do this to shut down public education have other options. They can send their kids to private schools, or they can home school them. If they don't like the property / school taxes where they live, they can go move to somewhere that has lower taxes.
Previously I thought that this suggestion was just short-sighted conservatism. It occurred to me though in further inspection that this is likely something more significant. I suspect that this comes up not as an attempt to protect the children, but rather as an attempt to end public education as we know it.
How could that be? It's rather simple, really. Let's say that an armed security guard is paid ~$50k/year. Note that entry-level school teachers make significantly less than that. I've never heard anyone suggest that one guard would be sufficient, they really need to come in pairs if you want them to stop an armed intruder, right? Hence you're already looking at $100k/year for one school. Though how many schools have only one set of doors? Every school I went to had at least three sets of doors through which someone could enter - the front (main) doors, a side door closer to the parking lot, and the third door for outdoor activities for the students to enter and leave through. Now you need a pair of guards at each door; you're looking at $300k/year for each school. High schools often have even more entrances, you could easily surpass $500k/year for guards there.
Yet who will pay for this? The schools can't raise money for it. My sons are in a well-funded district but they are still asked to bring tissues at the start of the year as the school can't afford to supply them. Tissues, to blow their fucking noses into when they aren't feeling well! So now we're talking about laying off 6-8 teachers per school to pay for armed guards, which will of course increase class sizes.
And don't pretend that this can be done by volunteers. Who has time and competency to do this for free? Do you really want kids defended by retirees carrying semi-automatic weapons? Of course not.
What I find interesting about this though is that the people who are trying to do this to shut down public education have other options. They can send their kids to private schools, or they can home school them. If they don't like the property / school taxes where they live, they can go move to somewhere that has lower taxes.
Just disarm the pre-k kids, (Score:2)
After all, kids 5 and under killed more people last year than terrorists [snopes.com].
Just getting rid of the 0-4 age group would change the balance significantly. After all, when a 2-year-old can shoot and kill his mother with her own gun [www.cbc.ca] (in WalMart, so it kind of figures).
A 2-year-old boy accidentally shot and killed his mother after he reached into her purse at a northern Idaho Walmart and her concealed gun fired, authorities said Tuesday.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It might be old news, but it happens way too often. We have a similar problem up here with people not locking their rifles. When a kid under 12 takes on and shoots and kills someone else, even if it was premeditated, no charge is possible against the kid - he can't even be questioned by police without the parents' permission.
Mind you, the parents should be charged with criminal negligence resulting in death, or even manslaughter. That's where the real problem started.
Re: (Score:2)
When a kid under 12 takes on and shoots and kills someone else, even if it was premeditated, no charge is possible against the kid - he can't even be questioned by police without the parents' permission.
It is hard to show that a kid under 12 really used a gun in a premeditated manner, so I'm OK with defending the kid in most circumstances as they often really don't understand the gravity of what they are doing.
Mind you, the parents should be charged with criminal negligence resulting in death, or even manslaughter. That's where the real problem started.
That is exactly what I have been harping for, for some time now. Gun owners should be held responsible for what their weapons are used for. I don't care how many guns someone wants to own as long as they are responsible with them; however if their gun is used to harm or kill someone they should f
Re: (Score:2)
We're obviously on the same page, but I would go further - if your gun gets out of your control for any reason, you are responsible for what happens with it. Open carry is just an invitation to have someone steal your gun. He didn't even get to take his new purchase home [alloutdoor.com]
Carrying a gun openly may seem like a good idea, but giving away your secrets is almost always a bad move. William Coleman III of Gresham, Oregon learned that the hard way when his openly-carried–and newly-purchased–pistol was stolen from him at gunpoint
and from our friends at WallyWorld [alloutdoor.com]
A 25-year-old strode into Wal-Mart with a Springfield XD 40 crammed into his waistband at the small of his back. His shirt only partially covered his firearm, so it was easily visible to a pair of miscreants.
While one bad guy waited outside, another followed the victim into the Wal-Mart bathroom, where he clobbered the gun’s owner, knocked him down, and took away his pistol.
Then he pointed the gun at its former owner and instructed him to leave. One of the two was arrested the next day, “loitering around the Jackson County Jail.” Nice.
so true (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
trim the administrative fat. Cut administrators and their absurd pensions and the schools could do a lot of things
I don't know how many administrators are in your school district, but there are not enough in my district to make up for it. Local district where I am consist of around 8 elementary schools, 3 middle schools, and 1 or 2 high schools. A low estimate might say we would need 6 guards for each elementary, 10 for each middle school, and 16 for each high school. Hence 48 + 30 + 16 = 74 guards for a typical school district. At $50k/year for each guard, that puts the annual budget for a district around $3.7 mi
Re: (Score:1)
If you live in Podunk, KS then maybe you can't afford the luxury of that many guards or to pay them such a nice salary. 2 per school at $30K/yr sounds a lot more reasonable. The idea is not to have a guard in every classroom or bathroom stall, but to take out an active shooter much earlier than waiting for police to arrive. And the skillset of the job would to me be below that of an LEO, or tradesman or college grad.
The Los Angeles Unified School District as one example apparently has a budget of $6.78 b
Re: (Score:2)
2 per school
That only works if your school has 1 or fewer doors, and doesn't really even adequately cover 1 door as they need to take breaks and walk around to keep from falling asleep on the job. Really 6 is the bare minimum and that is for a small school building.
$30K/yr sounds a lot more reasonable.
These aren't janitors or part-time elementary math teachers we're talking about, here. These are paid professionals. They need to be trained - at a bare minimum - annually with their weapons and on first aid. They need to be given a benefits package th
Re: (Score:1)
Doors? I've been talking about a couple of mall-cop type slobs at each school that could sit in an air-conditioned office with their feet up reading the newspaper all day for all I care, as long as their guns are on them and they immediately jump up and head over to where the sound of shots is coming from. It sounds like you're talking more of the kind of thing at courthouse buildings. That would be pricier, but not what the Right has advocated. (Heck, we would go even cheaper and just let the teachers
Re: (Score:1)
Tranquilizer darts... no school armory/nursery should be without them.
Today's sound bite: If you want to make school safe, put the 'civil' back into civilization. Arming everybody is hardly a good reflection on anybody outside the business.
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds like a good idea at first. But then, slippery slope. Non-lethal force invokes less reluctance in using it. Maybe darts could be used when there's a fight. Maybe for other things not thought of yet. Nope, that's unwise; bullets specifically for killing an active shooter, for me.
And I'm not about making schools "safe", which is the fool's errand you Progressives take us on, because nothing can be made "safe", or "equal", or "fair", for whatever those exactly mean. I just want people to be able to
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds like a good idea at first.
No it doesn't. It's complete bullshit, my silly attempt to mock people who want to treat the kids like a rhinoceros. In other words, Mr. Nugent, whoosh!
Re: (Score:1)
If a tree is mocked in the woods, and it doesn't take it as such, was it really mocked?
Ya, I guess if you're not even serious about your own intellectual integrity, then of course if you weren't spouting something flat-out wrong, chances are it's going to be non-serious anyways. I'll treat you as the joke that you are from now on.
Re: (Score:1)
The joke is on you, mein freund...
Re: (Score:1)
(For whatever "treat the kids like a rhinoceros" means.) Unfortunately, you're the joke that's on me. I can deal, tho.
Re: (Score:1)
For whatever "treat the kids like a rhinoceros" means.
Re: (Score:1)
My latest theory is that he reads what others have written, but then quickly forgets anything that's been said in the conversation except what he's said. (And then confuses portions of that for what others have said.) Oh well, at least his threshold at which conversation with him turns fruitless, as close as it is to the beginning of one, is at least farther than yours.
Re: (Score:1)
Eh, you stick with the superficial and you can troll each other indefinitely talking about the symptomatic things in life.
Re: (Score:1)
Ah yes, fusta's schtick about how everyone has it wrong and only you are the kind who seeks to and actually gets to the bottom of things. You're precious. Too bad you're so busy admiring yourself that you've no time to share and learn with others.
Re: (Score:1)
Ahh, you're assuming the good captain's role in your little theater. Sorry, I'm not as unique as you would like to think.
Re: (Score:1)
You assume wrong, again. MH42 is another person who's learned and evolved (some my way, some not). You're the only one who thinks you're the captain. Unfortunately you're a dime a dozen when it comes to those who don't want to learn anything.
Re: (Score:1)
MH42 is the only one here with any degree of sincerity, or he's a really good troll. You, on the other hand, are quite a different animal, just another mooch.
Evidently you didn't know who I was talking about, no matter, you're just a clown act anyway. You came in here wearing a red nose, matching your candidate's gag. Better watch out, he's gonna sue over copyright.
Re: (Score:1)
Gawd you're boring. I know you don't believe a word you say. It was more fun when you punked me. At least you tried to make it look like you were serious about something. Why not try to be more creative and subtle with your lies then, and make them more believable. (Hint: Stating things that are obviously the opposite of what you (or anyone) would believe does not exactly equal convincing!)
This (following you) might be tougher than I thought. I thought it was going to be entertaining. I thought the b
Re: (Score:2)
I've been talking about a couple of mall-cop type slobs at each school that could sit in an air-conditioned office with their feet up reading the newspaper all day for all I care, as long as their guns are on them and they immediately jump up and head over to where the sound of shots is coming from.
You're too late at that point. Your guards then are reactionary rent-a-cops. If someone came in through a different door how long would they have to squeeze off rounds before your guards arrive? Considering how much information on most schools is public, the shooter would almost certainly know which door is furthest from the office and start there.
And who do you think is going to run towards gun fire for $30k/year? Not anyone who is properly trained.
It sounds like you're talking more of the kind of thing at courthouse buildings. That would be pricier, but not what the Right has advocated.
Isn't the right trying to prevent shootings? A
Re: (Score:1)
Shootings aren't actually preventable, so hopefully no, the Right isn't trying to prevent shootings. And no one's talking about forcing any of the majority of teachers that are anti-gun hysteria Lefties to use a gun. I'm for just allowing those who want to step up to the plate to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Shootings aren't actually preventable
Actually the majority of them are. Armed guards won't do it, though.
the Right isn't trying to prevent shootings
Then why are you asking the schools to pony up millions of dollars per year for armed guards?
And no one's talking about forcing any of the majority of teachers that are anti-gun hysteria Lefties to use a gun.
There is a massive difference between what you describe and the vast majority of people who don't want to carry weapons. I for one own multiple guns but have no interest in ever carrying any gun - be it one I own or any other gun available anywhere - for defense. More importantly though as I already pointed out most teachers are old enough tha
Re: (Score:1)
Ya, I remember your rhetorical tactics now: subtly twist what the other person has been saying. As if you don't know. LOL.
p.s. Sorry about having that geriatric school district. I guess the advantage is that a few years later they could leave the teachers in place and just convert the place to an old folks home.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I've made clear what I've been talking about, and then you try to address slightly different things, as if they'd been advocated in our discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
I've made clear what I've been talking about, and then you try to address slightly different things
Can you show me where you think I've done that? Please, I would like to see an example. As a follow-up I'd like to know how that is analogous to how you previous accused me of opting to "subtly twist" [slashdot.org] what you have said.
Re: (Score:1)
You remind me of one of my college roommates, who just liked to argue, recreationally; he wasn't mad, he just thought it was fun. (Now I'm sure you're doing it for the standard Leftie reason for doing it, so that's the difference in that.) No matter what I say, you're going to find something about it, because it's your schtick. I think I can accept that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
just convert the place to an old folks home.
That's supposed to be better [cleveland.com]?
Re: (Score:1)
...standard Leftie reason...
Dude,please, who's doing the shtick? Do you really expect to be taken seriously? Usually masturbation is done solo.
Re: (Score:1)
Yep, being much more humane for the govt. to encourage crazies to go shoot up retirement homes than to deny them health care and let them suffer because they cost a lot and it's for The Greater Good of the society. The death panels could just run PSA's, as part of their cost containment and judicious distribution of health care dollars strategy for the nation.
Re: (Score:1)
Thou doth protest too much, methinks.
Re: (Score:1)
How about:
1) You say $50K times upteen people would bankrupt your school district.
2) I say, oh no, I was thinking $30K and two people each.
3) You continue on saying how awful $50K times upteen people would end up. As if I was the one that brought that combo into the discussion. At that point you were just arguing with yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
3) You continue on saying how awful $50K times upteen people would end up. As if I was the one that brought that combo into the discussion. At that point you were just arguing with yourself.
When did I ever claim that to be your argument? I have consistently said it was my own. You don't have to like it. The fact of the matter is however that for it to be effective you won't get by with less. If you hire some geriatric neighbor with a .22 to sit in a booth what is going to happen? They'll likely fall asleep. If you want someone who will be awake and ready to respond you need to pay a high enough wage that they won't bail out quickly. Indeed they don't need to be licensed LEOs, but they
Re: (Score:2)
The death panels could just run PSA's, as part of their cost containment and judicious distribution of health care dollars strategy for the nation.
Why would the death panels start doing that? They've pulled in more than enough profit all these decades without it. They bought congress and the white house with that profit some time ago, what else would they want now? They already bought themselves a license to print money [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:1)
When did I ever claim that to be your argument?
By continuing to argue against it [wikipedia.org]:
Re: (Score:2)
When did I ever claim that to be your argument?
By continuing to argue against it:
You're grasping at straws, there (no pun intended). The argument you are trying to make would require me to be pointing out how incredibly expensive the armed guards would be as a way to argue against paying the armed guards. If you want armed guards, go find a way to pay for them that doesn't require firing teachers. You haven't found a way to do that yet. That has been my argument from the very beginning of this JE.
Then go on and talk with yourself about it. I read your thinking of what would be needed and how costly it would be, and I agreed that would be costly, so why do you think I'd want to read more about how costly it would be.
I'm quite sure I am unable to force you to read what I write, and equally so I am qui
Re: (Score:1)
Ah, a Logan's Run fan. Dig it...
Re: (Score:1)
Protest? Please... You bring new (old) life to the party!
Re: (Score:1)
I guess you don't actually read or process what's been said to you. Maybe you think when people write things, it's just random arrangements of letters, so you only think about what you've been writing about. I know I've said how Conservatives would pay for amed guards at schools. You don't have to like it, but it was nevertheless brought up in our conversation, so I don't know why you think it wasn't. Must've been because someone other than yourself said it, I guess.
Re: (Score:1)
It's all about the greater good, man.
Re: (Score:1)
I guess that makes you the very best... man
Re: (Score:2)
I know I've said how Conservatives would pay for amed guards at schools.
And I've shown that your math doesn't work, it won't pay for the armed guards that you need. You put up fantasy numbers, I used actual numbers based on actual math. You might as well have said you would hire local priests to protect the schools with holy water under the belief that nobody would ever shoot in a building where there is a minister.
You don't have to like it, but it was nevertheless brought up in our conversation, so I don't know why you think it wasn't.
You brought it up, and I showed why it won't work. If I said I was going to fund a manned mission to Mars by closing Guantanamo you would say that wouldn't work
Re: (Score:1)
Yah, cuz I especially am sooo about the collective over the individual. But I guess you figure you would know better than everyone else.
Re: (Score:1)
I should write an arguebot for you. Then after I've said all I want to say about something, I could turn on the conversation auto-pilot, and you would be stimulated for hours. It wouldn't really matter what it said in each response, as long as it passably looked like it was saying something about the topic(s) of the conversation.
Re: (Score:2)
Then after I've said all I want to say about something,
If you have nothing else to say, then why do you keep hitting reply?
Similarly, why did you make this account? I've been wondering for a while now if you are the same Bill Dog we saw before, some sort of weird tribute account to him, or something else entirely...
Re: (Score:1)
A collective is made up of individuals. There is no contradiction in protecting the rights of both, in fact you can't differentiate their rights.
As for your post, it is nonsensical, meaningless, silly.
Now, just in case you do want to be serious for a brief instant, consider why you think armed guards are ever needed in a school. This is the more profound issue, instead of bickering over how to do it. If you can't sleep with both eyes closed and everybody has to carry, then your society has problems you seem
Re: (Score:1)
Sure you have. The neat thing about an arguebot for you is, I could just leave it running in an infinite loop, responding every time you responded, and it'd drive you crazy(er) as you tried to get the last post in.
Re: (Score:1)
Of course I created a sockpuppet troll account, Stephen Hawking. I named it "Bill Dawg" and said it's the evil twin of "Bill Dog". Jeebus, how much clearer could it be.
I can be serious for a brief instant. Your first paragraph is not only false, but obviously false. So explain how it makes any sense in your bizarro world, if you like.
Why do you think I think armed guards are needed in schools? Just because someone proposed the idea for conversation, and for the sake of conversation I threw in my two ce
Re: (Score:2)
I've even tried to bring this back to the topic of discussion and you pushed it back away.
Re: (Score:2)
(You must've skipped over the part where I said I wouldn't have armed guards, I'd just let those on the staff train and carry.)
Except for the part where you said you would try to hire armed guards at WalMart wages, of course.
But we can look at the "staff train and carry" part again, as you had no concern for the obvious problems created by that idea - and there are many. For one, what do you do if nobody on your staff wants to carry? There are plenty of schools that are staffed by majority geriatric teachers who wouldn't be of any value running around with a weapon. There are also plenty of people who simply don't want to car
Re: (Score:1)
You must've skipped over the part where I said I wouldn't have armed guards, I'd just let those on the staff train and carry.
Say whaaaaa??
Re: (Score:1)
Except for the part where you said if you were for armed guards in schools you would [strikeout: try to] hire armed guards at twice WalMart wages, of course.
FTFY. (You have all the data processing accuracy of fusta. Any serious conversation is really pretty pointless, when you guys are so poor at keeping straight what ground has been covered, and who's contributed what parts of it.)
For the rest, TRepetitive;DR.
p.s. I've currently got the last post!
Re: (Score:1)
Serious...
As if you ever were! Sorry, I value my keyboard to much to wear it out "arguing" with a clown. Short and sweet gets the point across. You are what you are.
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the part where you said if you were for armed guards in schools you would [strikeout: try to] hire armed guards at twice WalMart wages, of course.
You need to look at what Walmart actually pays, and what you are proposing to pay. The WalMart employees actually come out better. You said the schools would spend $30k on guards (which I pointed out they would never find any competent takers at that rate), which means the salary would be less than that if the school is supposed to be able to only spend $30k on the each guard after covering their part of insurance and other standard employer expenses. On the other hand, Walmart made a big deal a while ba
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe he's RG, or Red? You think he's back? It's been a while. If it is Red, I take back everything I said about this guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe he's RG
You're kidding, right? RG was not that intelligent.
Red?
The original Red? Maybe one of them, though they didn't generally hold out this long on a joke. Red 2.0, most definitely not. Red 2.0 was generally as intelligent as a fart joke (at most). The only thing that suggests it being Red 2.0 is that this account added me as a friend right away (while the original Bill Dog removed me as a friend some time ago), but that is a stretch to call that a meaningful indication of Red 2.0.
You think he's back? It's been a while
Not the original Red. Some
Re: (Score:1)
Oy vey! I'm going to die craving for a simple answer... I guess it'll be up to him to come through.
This can't be happening
Re: (Score:1)
The one you're under now is damaged goods.
You're such a bad liar... I know you love it. (I know you like it rough, in conversing. (And under my new account, I'm ready to give it to you good and hard. Just like you dish it out. I'm your fustamirror, baby.))
Re: (Score:1)
You don't really think I'm reading all of that/interested in rehashing our conversation, over and over, do you? I said what I had to say, you said what you had to say, it's a beautiful thing, why beat a dead horse.
Re: (Score:1)
Dig it!
Re: (Score:1)
If you live in Podunk, KS then maybe you can't afford the luxury of that many guards or to pay them such a nice salary. 2 per school at $30K/yr sounds a lot more reasonable... And the skillset of the job would to me be below that of an LEO
Yeah, about that of a high school chemist, and at 30K, they can move their meth factory into a double-wide a little closer to town. And the school is a great captive market, too.
Re: (Score:1)
Not everybody working at the local Walmart moonlights as a drug dealer. These jobs would be coveted by the more ambitious of that staff. Hell, to make Lefties happy, I'd even say let the cost of the training and testing be socialized. If you're a man or woman with balls, and can learn and pass tests on firearm safety and threat identification and marksmanship, you could double your pay [google.com].
Re: (Score:1)
Not everybody working at the local Walmart moonlights as a drug dealer.
Yer right! That would be the customers, bunch of drug dealin', sheep fuckin' okies, with guns... Trump's main voting block.
I love it when you say "lefty", it's so revealing that you're just another clown under the illusion that I can be offended. Sorry, you're 20 years too late, trying to bring all that old shit back to the table, mockery is all you merit.
Are you Donald Trump?
Re: (Score:1)
And people believe the garbage about the Right being about hate, when the people who are consistently stereotyping racists are you Lefties. An enviable position, I'll say that. But what will you guys do with the maybe one third of us who aren't fooled (and never will be). (Don't answer, I already know; it'll probably be one or more of the options historically used by your kind.)
Re: (Score:1)
And people believe the garbage about the Right being about hate...
Hey, when in Rome, right?