Boston School Superintendent Tommy Chang announced today he would fight any effort to arm BPS teachers - not that he's likely to see any proposal from either City Hall or BPD, where officials have long called for more restrictions on guns, not fewer.
In a statement in reaction to the president's proposal to arm some teachers with guns, Chang said in a statement:
The mere thought that teachers should be armed in order to ward off violence is utterly illogical and will only result in making our students and teachers less safe.
The real issue at hand continues to be access to guns. In Boston, we have some of the strictest gun laws in the country. We have a Mayor and a Police Commissioner who are fighting federal proposals that threaten to move us backward, such as the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. Just last year, we hosted the New England Regional Gun Summit right here at the Bolling Building to work with our neighboring cities and states on preventing the illegal flow of firearms into our city.
When it comes to school safety, we know that our focus should be on violence prevention and creating a culture of inclusion in all of our schools. We are providing regular training that’s rooted in best practices to ensure the safety of our students if a situation were to occur, not wasting our time training educators how to carry and use a firearm. Our priority in Boston will always be the well-being of our school communities, and bringing guns into schools is simply not the answer.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
I wonder how BPS Police feel
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 5:53pm
Working unarmed.
http://www.fox25boston.com/news/why-do-boston-scho...
https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/12/boston-...
Police at schools should be
By Tyler
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:36pm
Police at schools should be armed. That seems like a no brainier.
I agree that arming teachers would be counter productive though.
"No brainer"
By perruptor
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 7:41am
I find it odd that you choose to brag about this quality.
Doubt its an issue
By BlackKat
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 5:56am
From one of the linked articles showing they are not all unarmed, only when arms are not merited:
I don't think anyone is
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 5:56pm
I don't think anyone is suggesting all teachers be armed. If a few teachers want to be armed, why not? Give them a small pay bump too. Surely there are teachers who are already licensed gun owners.
I disagree
By Your name
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:38pm
Teachers who engage, love, and enrich their students should receive a pay bump.
Teachers who feel confident they can gun down one of their own students, accurately and efficiently, in the middle of a massacre should be fired.
So you want teachers who are
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 9:03pm
So you want teachers who are willing to accept the legal liability and invest their personal time to be prepared to risk their lives in defense of their students fired? How dare they want to preserve their life and the lives of their students from murderers.
Guns do not preserve lives
By perruptor
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 7:48am
All the evidence is that increased presence of guns produces more death. That's what they are made for, after all. People who obtain and keep guns are more likely to be shot than those who do not.
How are police responding to a call to know that the person they see firing a gun is a teacher? Why would those police not open fire on that person?
That's a real concern
By Roman
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 10:09pm
And developing best practices to mitigate it would be the 'training' part of the 'training' that we'all are talking about for teachers and police.
Because
By Stevil
Sat, 02/24/2018 - 9:15am
Teachers don't have enough training just being teachers? Now they need small arms and active shooter training too? Why don't we just combine the professions and make all cops teachers and vice versa.
Lots of teachers posting on twitter no thanks on the gun, but they'd appreciate some more classroon supplies. So now it's guns for glue instead of butter in econ 101?
I mean
By poster
Sat, 02/24/2018 - 12:01pm
if kids in Econ 101 need glue, the education system has WAY bigger problems than the lightning-strike risk of a shooter.
By the time they get to college, they should at least know how to use PowerPoint.
Are the teachers going to gun
By anon
Sat, 02/24/2018 - 10:40am
Are the teachers going to gun down a student armed with an assault rifle who has just killed 17 other students? I think anyone in the armed students vicinity with a gun should take the armed student down. And save lives. Get it?
If the solution to a problem...
By Stevil
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:01pm
...is more of what's causing the problem, you've got a problem.
The problem isn't
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:15pm
good guys with guns.
And the soluyion isn't good yuys shooting bad guys
By Stevil
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:33pm
And it's not just schools.
We don't live in the wild west
Or is that what you'd prefer?
This is about the dumbest solution I've heard.
How about we.all carry guns all the time. Someone starts shooting, we all just pull out our guns and blaze away at anyone with a gun...
...oh, wait a minute...
Strawmen are immune to bullets
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:37pm
But let's run with your example. Suppose we're all* armed all** the time.
Who's the idiot who's going to start making trouble first?
*With background checks and range tests to get your LTC, same as we have now. So not everyone in the mathematical sense but in the rhetorical sense.
**We could even have reverse stop-and-frisk. If you're out and about without your weapon, you're issued a ticket. And for good measure, if you're intoxicated while carrying you're sentenced to 10 years hard labor. It'll be a fuckin' puritan utopia.
What fantasyland do you live in
By Stevil
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:44pm
Virtually all of these mass shooters are on a suicide mission. Do you think they care?
NBC news said arming 20% of teachers means 640k teachers w guns. What could possibly go wrong with an extra half million guns on the street in.our schools no less?
Let's say half
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:57pm
are on a suicide mission.
What's wrong with deterring the other half?
To your other point...
Statistically speaking 36% of those teachers already own a gun themselves or their husbands or wives do. You're not talking about "extra" guns in any meaningful way.
As for 20% being armed...I don't know what the magic number is. Maybe 1% is enough. Maybe 20% isn't enough. I don't think there's a scientific measurement anyone's taken to see what the right number is. I know when I went to school in suburban Philadelphia in the 90s, some of the oldtimers waxed nostalgic about the good old days in more rural parts of Pennsylvania when on the first day of hunting season, everyone (teachers and students) brought their rifles to school so they could go hunting right after classes let out and there weren't really any incidents to speak of.
This is new ground, I'll admit, and I understand the instinct to caution, but again...36% of households own guns and do so without issue. Even in Liberal Massachusetts there are something like 300k+ LTCs for about 2.5 million households so about 10% of households again without any issues...so while I understand the apprehension the numbers don't indicate any particular danger with responsible law-abiding people owning and carrying firearms.
Without any issues...
By Stevil
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:13pm
You're not up on your gun stats are you?
Accidental discharge, suicides, domestic violence and on and on.
About 100k people are shot every year. A good number of them by themselves because a gun was "convenient" and they were depressed. Many many of the perpetrators are "responsible" gun owners.
And we are not talking gun "owners". We are talking armed people in the halls at school. Those are walking accidents waiting to happen.
Arming teachers a moronic idea. And what about colleges, christmas parties, music concerts and countless other venues. This is nothing but a dangerous prophylactic. Not a solution.
I am up on my stats
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:26pm
Of that 100k, 20k are suicides, which while tragic are immaterial to this discussion.
Of the 10k unlawful homicides, roughly half occur in the cores of our most violent cities which collectively account for 60% of homicides but only 20% of the population. And even that's misleading because not even in the Chicago or Newark or Detroit is anywhere close to *everyone* a killer.
Stats tabulated from the wiki page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_State...
This with more guns than people means that no, in fact nearly all gun owners and people who carry are perfectly capable of doing it safely.
As for "accidents" well I'd need to do more digging but you've got to exclude apples-to-oranges things like hunting accidents during peak season and "duh...I was cleaning my gun and it shot my girlfriend in the chest six times" stupidity. Yes...some people are too stupid to operate a firearm...or a motor vehicle...or be in charge of bridge maintenance and building inspection...and we somehow get along.
That's a stretch. Are armed police the nation over (something like a million people) also all accidents waiting to happen? Roughly 500 times a year a cop has to shoot someone. Out of a million people. For many of whom the job consists of intervening in dangerous situations.
You don't like guns...I get it. But risks need to be put into perspective and judged against the status quo, not just against their worst-case scenarios.
I actually DO like the guns
By Stevil
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 8:07pm
I just see absolutely zero reason for anyone ither than LEOs and a few other exceptions to gave one in their home or on their person.
You leave a lot out (like the fact that simply possessing a gun significantly increases the odds you'll be one of those 20k suicides).
And 500 times? You mean kill someone or shoot someone.
Bottom line, no statistical chance in hell that half a million guns in schools or anywhere increases safety. #lawoflargenumbers
See swirly s comments below.
Theft
By BostonDog
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:19pm
Combine how many guns get stolen from private owners plus the number of things that get stolen at public schools and you have the magic recipe for even more violence. Teachers need teaching supplies, not weaponry.
Anyone who thinks the solution to gun violence is more guns is an idiot. The United States is the only developed country which has mass shootings like this. How about trying more restrictions instead of more weapons for a change.
Let custodians carry guns
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 9:23pm
They know the schools, students and staff better than anyone.
Then why
By capecoddah
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 9:42pm
Then why do they most always pick gun-free zones to murder people?
You mean like Fort Hood?
By Stevil
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 9:55pm
An army base filled with armed trained killers where a guy w a pistol.took out 13 people?
Correct me if I'm wrong
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 10:13pm
But Major Hassan went all Allahu Akbar! on the cafeteria where all the patrons had their sidearms locked up, as in not on them.
Same thing with the Washington Navy Yard shooter a few years back. Only MPs around the perimeter of the base had guns...civilian staff and people who aren't MPs weren't (and still aren't) allowed to carry weapons on military installations.
And the nut who shot up that church in Texas was stopped by a parishoner who ran out to his truck and got his ... you guessed it ... AR-15.
Not gun free zones
By Stevil
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 5:47am
At least the military facilities.
So what you are saying is our liveral gun laws allow people to shoot up our places of work, learning, education and recreation where we congregate in large numbers and the solution is not testricting gun access to the masses. It's the opposite, arm the masses. And somehow you think this should just be normal life?
That's exactly what I'm saying
By Roman
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 10:06pm
If we force people to go unarmed and congregate together, that invites pot-shots that an armed population may deter and/or put a stop to.
I'm still confused why you think Ft. Hood helps you make your point.
Not exactly a soft target
By Stevil
Sat, 02/24/2018 - 9:07am
And it's impossible to argue with someone whose basic premise is we should go backwards 150 years in history and live in the Wild West.
Civilized modern people take the stance that you limit access to guns which works in every orher developed country. You seem to prefer the living standards of Venezuela and central african notions living under repressive despotic regimes.
I've got news for you
By Roman
Sat, 02/24/2018 - 2:48pm
If you look at just the gun ownership numbers, we already live in the wild west. But somehow even these episodes of violence are rare and our murder rate ranks considerable below central Africa and Venezuela or Central America.
Further, it drives by nearly 50 pct if you consider the population outside inner cities. Not to cherry-pick statistics but to make the point that violence in the US is a concentrated problem whereas in more violent countries it is more widespread.
You know...
By Kaz
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 8:07am
...just like Fort Hood. Oh, wait...
But here comes Roman
By erik g
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:37pm
on the inside track!
If arming
By capecoddah
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:10pm
If arming teachers saves just one life, it is worth it.
Congratulations!
By erik g
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:36pm
During a week whose political headlines were filled with things like the Republican party arguing "The president is too stupid, unobservant, and self-absorbed to act as the agent of a foreign power," you have nevertheless managed to eke out a win as the dumbest piece of shit I've heard say anything in a public forum!
Right back atcha
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:49pm
Argue against the idea, not against the person.
Your post is a complete non-sequitor.
Well, OK
By BostonDog
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:21pm
If arming teachers results in just one needless death, it was a horrible idea.
Philosophy 101
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:31pm
If you push this button, the 10 people standing behind the one-way mirror will die. If you don't push this button, 11 random people in your city will die.
All public policy choices result in bad outcomes for someone. What's the right balance? If armed teachers deter 90% of school shootings in the next century, "preventing" hundreds of deaths you don't see but result in accidental death of a dozen children that you do see...what then?
I'm told the status quo is not normal. I agree. That means a different approach is required. Maybe after twenty or thirty years of that different approach we'll be able to tell. It's a grim calculus for sure, but it's either that or complete guesswork and ideological posturing. Not scientific at all.
Sophistry GR-1000
By lbb
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 8:04am
Please show me the universe where anyone is actually confronted with that choice.
And your assertion that your bad outcome is less bad than other bad outcomes is backed up by nothing but the fumes emanating from your fevered imagination. "Much good in your 'if'" indeed. Come back when you have anything that's supported by evidence.
A great many of the world's problems
By SamWack
Sat, 02/24/2018 - 9:01am
derive from people who think that Moral Philosophy is kind of like Sudoku, but easier.
No
By capecoddah
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:35pm
If disarming the public results in just one needless death, it was a horrible idea.
Demonstrate where this has happened
By lbb
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 8:05am
You cannot prove this. It is impossible to prove. Therefore, your entire argument is invalid. Go lie down, you're drunk.
Denominator lives matter
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:59pm
How many people will be killed as a result of having lots of guns in the schools?
Remember: teachers get mad at principals, too. Guns have to be accessible and loaded - and can be grabbed and used to attack. Plenty of incidents of kids grabbing guns off of rentacops in school. Just google it
Of course, sometimes armed teachers in elementary schools just forget about their piece when they leave it somewhere. OOPSY!
Oh, yeah - what about those armed cops down in Florida? The ones who were there through the whole recent incident? The cops who exchanged fire with the Columbine assailants before they entered the building? Super effective.
I don't follow his reasonning
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:15pm
How exactly is having some teachers/staff armed going to make students and teachers less safe?
And what exactly is illogical about the idea that having some teachers/staff armed would provide a level of deterrence and in the God-forbid worst scenario some level of protection against an armed attacker?
I have no issue most of everything else he said about having schools "teach a culture of inclusion" assuming he actually means imparting values of good citizenship and empathy for your fellow man and not code words for SJW activism in lieu of what I said, but it really does not follow that armed personnel in the schools are a waste of time or a detriment to safety.
There was an armed cop at the school in florida
By zetag
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 6:09am
Not only did it not deter the killer, he hid outside through the entire shooting and didn't engage.
Not *an* armed cop
By perruptor
Sat, 02/24/2018 - 7:37am
Turns out, there were FOUR armed cops there, and they all stayed outside while those inside were being killed.
Roman,
By whyaduck
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 8:37am
you should perhaps talk to some teachers and ask them how they feel? I think that would help you understand the situation better in regards to your first question.
You are making a big assumption that having an armed teacher would stop anyone with a, say an AR-15, who is on a suicide mission and wants to kill others before his coup de grace. And both Columbine as well as Parkland had armed guards who could not or would not stop the shooter(s). In fact, the armed security guard in Florida hid behind a concrete column while the massacre went on and never entered the building:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2018/02/22...
And, then, there is the cost:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/20...
So a teacher has say a AR-15 to match a potential killer's AR-15 (as it seems to be the weapon of choice). He/she opens with a rain of fire as well as the potential killer. So, the chance of any collateral damage is I guess part of what we would pay, as a society, for arming the good guys?
Teacher's are there to teach the kids, Roman. And we ask them to do much more than that these days. They have enough going on, on a day to day basis. They should not be law enforcement officers, too. And, more pointedly, you may be cool with a society that is so fucked up that it can't come together to address why many of us are seemingly ok with children, teens and adults are being murdered in mass shootings that we want to throw more guns into the mix. I hope for something better out of this mess.
Can arm the cops already in schools
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:17pm
They are called "Community Resource Officers". A handgun that they are already used to and trained to have.
Florida had an armed CRO, but he stayed outside the school while Cruz shot it up. Rather than answer questions why, he just retired.
A, as in singular
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:34pm
I'll say outright I wasn't there, and I'm spitballing, but...
Maybe if there were more than one then
1. More chance of intervention
2. Less chance of ... how to put this delicately ... the one person feeling like he's alone.
More armed CROs instead of asking teachers to take on more responsibility...that makes sense. But it shouldn't be all or nothing. If a teacher or staff member is willing to get trained then why not?
No one's under any delusion of gun = instant safety.
But the opposite of gun = instant calamity isn't true either.
Unbelievable.
By Daniel
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:04pm
I can't believe people are actually saying that teachers should carry guns. Of course Trump would be clueless enough to say that, but it's hard to believe anyone other than an NRA fanatic would repeat it. More guns = more problems, more violence, more shootings, more deaths.
And stop with the Second Amendment silliness. A generation ago, nobody, including hunters, thought they had a "right" to own or carry handguns or automatic weapons. Then, thanks to decisions by ultra-right Supreme Court justices Scalia and Thomas, amplified by an NRA hungry for more dollars in their unethical coffers, and the Second Amendment "right" to do anything with any type of gun, with absolutely no control, was born. That was a tragic moment for this country.
Will the courage of those high school students change anything? I hope so, but I'm not optimistic, given the spineless congressional Republicans who are scared to be on the wrong side of the NRA and the Tea Party lunatics. History will judge them harshly for selling out to the highest bidder with such cynicism, rather than listening to their consciences and standing up to do the right thing.
I am not a fanatic
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:55pm
and I did not vote for President Trump. But I will next time.
In fact, I don't even own a firearm. Never have. Many of my friends and extended family do own firearms. A buddy of mine lives in Manhattan and went through the rigamarole of getting himself a gun permit there. None has ever had any issues.
I shoot recreationally, and will likely purchase a pistol soon because it gets annoying to use community property after a while.
My ideas are either my own or cited where they aren't. I don't take money from anyone to post them here.
Haha
By lbb
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 8:06am
You're not gonna get the chance, skippy. But you can visit him in prison.
How about non-lethal defense?
By BostonDog
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:38pm
Give the teachers training in whatever sorts of evasive and self defense measures are suitable for area. Just don't bring more lethal weapons into schools that can be stolen and/or used against innocent people.
Also a good idea
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:51pm
But it's not an either-or choice.
No
By BostonDog
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 9:27am
There is a zero percent chance someone innocent is inadvertently killed with non-lethal defense.
There is a non-zero chance someone is inadvertently killed with lethal defense.
That's why guns in schools is a horrible idea.
ahem
By anon
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 9:55am
Victoria Snelgrove. Ahem. All the people who had heart attacks when tazed. Ahem.
Maybe?
By whyaduck
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 8:39am
Roman,
Your maybes are living in a fantastical world.
Most schools down south have
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:41pm
Most schools down south have an armed cop called a Resorce Officer. If that’s a bad idea then I give up. Sure arming teachers is not practical but armed security is a no brainer..
What makes you think they don't do that here?
By adamg
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 9:26pm
Yes, Boston school police are not armed. But BPD cops are, and they do go into Boston schools.
That part of the news story
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:22pm
That part of the news story did bother me a little. For anyone that's read the critical incident report on the 2015 San Bernadino shooting on page 27 there is the following:
"The officers had learned during active shooter training to form a three- to four-officer contact team and immediately attempt to capture or neutralize the shooter(s)."
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/file/891996/down...
In the Parkland shooting, was the policy of the sheriff's department for individual officers to go in to neutralize an active shooter or were the expected to await additional resources to form such as 3-4 officer contact team?
3-4 officer contact team
By anon
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 9:13am
Okay.
But teachers are expected to go it alone?
Presumably
By Roman
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 10:01pm
there would be safety in numbers.
Well, then here's some safety for you
By perruptor
Sat, 02/24/2018 - 8:13am
30-round, 50-round, 100-round magazines
5 seconds to empty a 30-round magazine
3200 feet per second
3-inch exit wounds
If those numbers make you feel safe, you'll love this
ER doctor discussing the treatment of Parkland victims:
What if an armed teacher goes
By speakingouthere
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:43pm
What if an armed teacher goes off the deep end?
Disgruntled, Disciplined by Principal?, Fed up, angry at students?
What if a student gets ahold of Teachers gun?
I'm just putting this out here for discussion.
Could a Teacher become "armed and dangerous?"
Replace every instance of
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 6:50pm
Replace every instance of teacher with cop.
Well ...
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:52pm
Cops are many times more likely to engage in domestic violence and to commit suicide (often with their service weapons) than the general population.
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/...
They aren't known to be good at teaching math or history while on patrol, but that's because it isn't part of their job duties - kind of liked armed patrol isn't part of teaching duties.
What stops him now?
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:00pm
If he's already licensed and owns a firearm, what prevents him from going off the deep end now?
Same thing for violent students. They exist now, and they bring knives and guns and their fists and feet to school. The question to ask is whether this proposal would make the problem worse, better, or have no effect.
We can guess at worst-case scenarios all we want but we'd need hard numbers to tell.
To answer your question
By BostonDog
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:33pm
Time. If someone has to drive home to get their gun they're likely to cool off. If they have it on their hip it only takes a few seconds to go from pissed off to active shooter.
The risk posed by someone who plans their attack is unchanged so might as well lower the risk of spontaneous attacks.
Well, what is that risk?
By Roman
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:43pm
And how does it stack up against the problem it's meant to mitigate?
And to the point here...what is the reduction in risk associated with cooling down? How does it vary with age, gender, and any metrics that can be meaningfully collected to gauge personality or disposition? Are sleeper hot-heads likely to be employed as teachers in schools already?
Some of these things can be quantified.
What you seem to be missing
By anon
Fri, 02/23/2018 - 9:09am
1. other countries don't have these problems
2. when other gun culture countries started having these problems, they banned the weapons of choice.
Why can't they put metal
By anon
Thu, 02/22/2018 - 7:15pm
Why can't they put metal detectors and pass laws for stricter gun purchasing screening rather than having teachers being armed? I don't know. Too many guns in Boston and Boston neighborhoods right now as it is. Most of them stolen and in the possession of gang members (who all have head issues to begin with). BPD does an incredible job but their efforts are useless if the revolving court doorsjust kerp on turning.
Pages
Add comment