Arming Teachers Sounds Like a Bad Idea, But It’s Not

Mar 8

Mar 8 Arming Teachers Sounds Like a Bad Idea, But It’s Not

Photo by Cora Kuhlenbeck

Jonathan Wang

BAM! You’re in history class when you hear the distinctive sound of an AR-15 firing a deadly shot. What do you do? The shooter is very close (possibly in the next classroom) and there isn’t enough time to barricade the door. To defend yourself, you grab the best weapon you have, a chromebook, and prepare for the worst. The only police officer to defend the entire school is stationed next to the main entrance, 200 yards away from your class, while you can hear the shooter in the next classroom. In other words, the police officer is nowhere near you. Hopefully, they make it to your classroom before the shooter.

In reality, this is a terrible situation that we all hope will never come to fruition. But this hypothetical situation presents a very real problem: how can we deter school shooters? One potential solution to stop a school shooter is to allow teachers to voluntarily arm themselves and conceal carry (carrying a pistol in a method so that the gun is hidden) on school grounds.

Allowing teachers to arm themselves has been proven to work. On October 1, 1997, Joel Myrick, an assistant principal at Pearl High School, held school shooter Luke Woodham at gunpoint with a 45 - caliber pistol until police arrived and apprehended him. Before being apprehended by Myrick, Woodham had killed two and injured seven students. If Myrick hadn’t been there that day or didn’t have his firearm, many more lives would have been lost.

Some might argue that a tiny pistol cannot stop a AR-15. However,the Pearl High School shooter, who had a .30-.30 rifle (.30-.30 rifles fires a more powerful bullet than an AR-15’s 5.56mm bullet, 1902.173 foot-pounds vs 1311 foot-pounds respectively), was stopped by the weaker pistol. Additionally, a pistol or any modern firearm is more advantageous than throwing blunt objects such as a chromebook or textbook. Ask yourself if you would rather have a firearm or your textbook for self defense during a school shooting.

In addition, teachers carrying firearms acts as a deterrent against shootings because mass public shooters are more likely to attack places where no one is armed. According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, 94% of school shootings between 1950 and June 2019 happened in gun-free zones. After all, a gun-free sticker isn’t going to stop anyone with a gun.

Some may argue that arming teachers is dangerous and frightening. Teachers might snap and shoot a student; a student might try to steal a gun from a teacher; or a teacher might accidentally shoot an innocent bystander. With 25 states (and 315 school districts in Texas alone) allowing concealed carry, shouldn’t there be plenty of cases of concealed carrying failing horribly? According to a study (published on Social Science Research Network) that analyzed schools from January 2000 through August 2018, there was only one case of accidental discharge. The teacher in question accidentally discharged the firearm in the bathroom and no one was hurt or killed.

The aforementioned evidence shows that arming teachers is safe when teachers receive the proper training and screening. Because Wisconsin currently doesn’t allow teachers to arm themselves at school, there is no process here to certify teachers to carry guns. A good, rigorous process Wisconsin should attempt to implement should be similar to that of Texas’s. In Texas, there are four requirements a person must meet in order to be able to conceal carry at school: teacher must be an employee; teacher must have License to Carry (Wisconsin has a stricter process to get Concealed Carry Weapon License compared to Texas’s License to Carry); teacher must pass a psychological exam; and teachers must complete Texas Commission on Law Enforcement (TCOLE) approved 80 hour School Marshal course. According to TCOLE, the topics covered in the course are “physical security, improving the security of the campus, use of force, active shooter response, and weapon proficiency.” The psychological exam is to safeguard against teachers snapping at a student and ensures that the teacher remains cool under pressure. All this strict training and screening helps guarantee that teachers know how to safely and properly handle firearms and know what to do during emergency situations. Furthermore, the long and difficult process also eliminates unqualified teachers.

Another counter argument is that the police officer in our school will protect us. After all, she is also carrying a gun and has proper training on how to use it. That is probably similar to what the students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School believed until a school shooting happened there. According to NBC news, the armed school resource officer never went inside during the Parkland school shooting. As a result of the shooting, 17 people died, and 17 more were injured. Teachers with guns are far more likely to protect students because they are in the same classroom as the students. Furthermore, the teacher may not hit the school shooter, but the sound of a 160 decibel pistol (planes are only 140 decibels) being fired would scare any shooter.

It would also take valuable time for the officer to reach far parts of the school. The measured distance from the main office area to NA109 (a room located in the history wing) is about 200 yards. Assuming that the officer has a constant running speed of 16.5 mph or 8.0667 yd/s (ignoring the fact she will have to speed up and slow down around corners or when she starts and stops running), we can calculate that it would take about 24.8s for the officer to reach that room. That is a long time to be waiting, especially in a life or death scenario. Making similar calculations, we find that it takes about 19.2 seconds to reach S-8 (furthest science room from main hallway) and about 10.2 seconds to reach room 19 (a math room) from the main office. If a teacher nearby had a gun, the shooter could be dealt with directly in a matter of seconds, and not a few dozen seconds. After all, during these life or death moments, a few seconds can make the difference.

There are many reasons that support giving teachers the ability to arm themselves: documented cases of success; only one example of teachers misusing the gun; and the fact that it would take a dangerous amount of time for the school’s officer to reach, let alone stop the shooter. As a result, I believe that arming school teachers is one of the main ways to combat school shooters.While it may not be a pleasant thought to think about, arming teachers is an important idea that must be discussed if Hamilton High School wants to ensure the continued safety and lives of the students. After all, “Being ready before the storm strikes is sometimes the difference between life and death.” - Jeff Last.