Published: Sunday, Jan. 20 2013 12:00 a.m. MST
I'm an educator, and I carry concealed, having gotten the proper licenses.
I have had many hours of firearms training, and I continue to train several
times a year, just in case. Now, if that's an issue, please see
the constitution (specifically the 2nd amendment) for reference. Otherwise,
I'll continue to exercise my rights as an American citizen, and be prepared
to protect my students from any individual with intent to kill. I'm also willing to sacrifice myself for my students, but not simply
throw my life away. You quote the AAP, but what deranged individual will care
about their words? At the end of the day, that's all they are: words; &
neither do their words eliminate illegal gun violence. I am doing more than
simply spouting words; I am taking action. I am prepared, and ready, though I
pray the day for such action never occurs.So, perhaps you ought to
homeschool your children, where they'll be more "safe," or maybe
leave this state and move to any of the other 46 states that feel "gun-free
zones" aren't really the kill zones that they truly are. It's your
Mrs. Walkingshaw, your stance is understandable, but is based only on emotion.
School shootings and mall shootings and theater shootings happen in
"gun-free zones." They do not tend to happen in locations where
it's well known that law-abiding adults are allowed to carry concealed
firearms.Also, the American Academy of Pediatrics is seriously wrong
on this issue, just like they have been on other issues in recent years when
they make unfounded political statements rather than scientific ones.Teachers should not be forced to carry a concealed firearm, of course, but if
they want to, and are willing to go through a mental evaluation and be trained,
they should be allowed to do so, with the blessing of the administration. When
teachers are properly trained, they'll know what to do and what not to do
-- just like police officers. And, to me, "trained" isn't a
2-hour lecture, it's a 3-day, intensive, hands-on course, with periodic
refresher training.If one of these rare-but-horrific incidents
starts, our wonderful teachers are already right there on the scene.
Let's let them protect the kids, for Pete's sake.
"For every one time a gun in a home was used in self-defense,"We are thankful they are still alive. I still like the idea of
having police do their paperwork in schools. Visible presence is a deterrent.
As a parent and grandparent I absolutely agree with this article. I for one do
not want my children and grandchildren in a classroom or school where guns are
allowed. I do not believe that the concealed weapons permit requirements give
someone the skills necessary to defend themselves much less anyone else if faced
with an armed assailant. Also, I believe adding more guns into a public school
will only increase the chance of a tragic accident. Why should a parents right
to know and keep their child from harm be less than the right to bear arms? Our
Nation is under an epidemic of gun worship. To me it borders on insanity.
Please Ms Walkingshaw -- what is your "Constitutional" right to know
whether there is a gun in your child's classroom? The fact that you want
to know something and believe you have a right and a need to know something does
not give you a Constitutional right to know it.Regarding the title of your
column -- how about adding "effective" to "smart?"I like
the idea of a properly trained and motivated adult having access to a gun in a
school. However, I would be willing to consider proposals to ban such access
when I am convinced such proposals would ban introduction of all firearms from
all sources by all people and not just the law abiding.If the mere
enactment of laws would prevent a Sandy Hook tragedy then Sandy Hook never
happened because what that horrible person did was, in fact, illegal.
"For every one time a gun in a home was used in self-defense, there were
four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and eleven
attempted or completed suicides." I went to Utah.gov and looked
at the vital statistics. I'd love to have the exact link because the vital
statistics for 2011 (as far as I can tell) say there were only two- three deaths
due to "accidental discharge of firearms" and 28 homicides due to the
discharge of firearms. Anyone find the link where this stat came from?
20 children are dead. There is a gun shooting in America almost
every month. Columbine. Trolley Square. We
need to do something different. Not the same.
If you are using a gun for protection is it really an assault weapon with a 100
round gun clip?
@peanut"but if they want to, and are willing to go through a
mental evaluation and be trained, they should be allowed to do so, with the
blessing of the administration. When teachers are properly trained, they'll
know what to do and what not to do -- just like police officers. And, to me,
"trained" isn't a 2-hour lecture, it's a 3-day, intensive,
hands-on course, with periodic refresher training."I agree with
you peanut. I believe that most people would also. However, under Utah law, one
must only undergo a 4 hour classroom training class with no requirement for
actually shooting the gun, in order to obtain a CCP. No ongoing refresher
training is necessary. Could you imagine someone getting a drivers
license without showing proficiency in actually operating a vehicle?Gun ownership is a huge responsibility. A responsibility that many are not
equipped to handle.I am also quite certain that the NRA would balk
at your requirement for such "intensive" training.
To parents against teachers having guns in school,Please understand if
your childs classroom is neverattacked, your child isn't likely to
ever even see thegun.If the classroom is attached, that armed
teacher willlikely mean the difference between your child andother
children surviving or not.Consider joining me in asking your
staterepresentative to offer police firearms training toteachers who
volunteer to take on the added burdenof helping to defend the children.Keep in mind that the presidents children attend aschool that is
protected by armed guards. Our nationsbest security experts have
determined this is thebest way to keep them safe.
Re: Pagan: Yes, we do need to do something different. We need to get rid of
"gun free zones" and encourage more concealed carry by responsible,
stable, law-abiding adults.Re: D.balance: I too question the
statistics quoted by Mrs. Walkingshaw. Studies have shown that in the U.S.
each year guns are used to prevent crimes more than 2 million times, usually
without a shot being fired. But if we are to believe Mrs. Walkingshaw's
statistics, that would mean many millions of murders and suicides. Sorry, but
her numbers don't match with reality.Yes, Mrs. Walkingshaw, we
do know better than the UEA and the NEA on many issues. And if teachers are
willing to go through a mental evaluation and serious training (see my previous
post), they deserve your respect and gratitude, not your condescending
accusation of being vigilantes. But I will concede one of your points: A purse
is not a secure way to carry concealed. It's much better for the firearm
to be concealed ON THE PERSON.
Another shooting, this time a fifteen year old in New Mexico. How do you know
which 15 year old is a good guy or a bad guy? If he did not have access to
lethal force and an apparent assault rifle, five people may be alive
re: Louie...is a semi-automatic 22 caliber REALLY an assault weapon? And it only
takes 1/2 second to swap out a clip. So the difference between a "100 round
clip" and 10 10-round clips is 5 seconds. So if we're going to DO
something to try to stop predators from killing innocents...by the way,
something that has occured in our history for far longer than guns have been
around and with much greater efficiency...then let's look at things that
are real solutions rather than some foolish, feel good, trampling of
others' rights that has NO chance of fixing the problem.To the
author of the article. Feel your angst, especially since we've been made
to fear guns over the last 30 years or longer. But, this has been in place for
awhile now in Utah...how many teachers carrying concealed in Utah have had their
guns stolen by students, or left them around for accidental shootings? I
haven't heard of any....have you? Perhaps there is some comfort there for
you, I don't know.
Re: JoeBlow: I'm not suggesting that 3-day intensive training be required
for concealed carry in general (although more training is always good). But for
teachers who want to carry concealed in schools, I am highly recommending that
they attend such intensive training. The training should be supported and paid
for by the school district (not the federal government, please).Intensive training is also a good idea for concealed carry in general. But
absolutely requiring it? No, I think that would leave too many responsible,
law-abiding citizens defenseless. High quality, intensive self-defense
firearms training is quite expensive, especially for individuals. But for
school districts it's relatively cheap when compared to the cost of hiring
full-time security guards. Teachers are already there on the job, in the
classroom with the children, and are in the best position to take quick action
if needed.If teachers are properly trained and evaluated, I'm
fully in favor of letting them carry concealed. Our kids will be safer for it.
And if it's WIDELY KNOWN that teachers are supported in carrying
concealed, then these horrible incidents will be even less likely to start in
the first place.
Cool Cat Cosmo Payson, UTConservative gun advocates often say
"When guns are outlawed, only criminals will have guns." However, many
people in states with strict gun laws will travel outside their state and
purchase guns and take them back to there home states in violation of state law.
Since the Second Amendment does not apply to this situation, does that mean
that these people "legally" purchasing guns in one state and taking them
"illegally" into another state are now criminals?Also, it
appears that the ineffectiveness of legislation designed to reduce gun violence
comes from NRA and gun rights lobbying efforts to subvert that legislation as it
goes through the process of becoming law. Not only that, but often the NRA,
through a supporting member of Congress, will insert amendments to unrelated
legislation to change the law and therefore making current gun laws useless.Oftentimes, these legislators say one thing to appease the general
public regarding gun violence issues while circumventing gun safety issues in
compliance to NRA directives. This is consistant with the NRA philosophy of
favoring guns over public safety. The "more guns, the better" attitude
makes for immense profits and appeals to its extreme fringe.
"If teachers are properly trained and evaluated, I'm fully in favor of
letting them carry concealed. Our kids will be safer for it."Completely agree."I'm not suggesting that 3-day intensive
training be required for concealed carry in general (although more training is
always good)"Do you feel that a 4 hour class with no range time
is reasonable for the average person to then be allowed to carry in public? I
fully support concealed carry, but feel the requirements should be stepped up.
@ Mad Hatter: Are such people criminals, who cross state lines to
avoid oppressive laws that infringe on their second amendment rights? Perhaps
technically; yet so were our forefathers, who stood up against tyranny in
government, during the American Revolution, and some would argue during the
Civil War. We hail such as heroes today (i.e. George Washington,
Patrick Henry, Paul Revere, etc.), but in their time they were the
"right-wing gun-nuts," and would be by today's standards considered
terrorists. They were also the minority in their beliefs and desire to resist
the British and their policies, yet I think we'd all agree (at least I hope
so) that we are immensely grateful they stood up for what was right anyway and
sacrificed everything to establish our nation.The second amendment
was NOT simply established for recreation or hunting (as some argue/imply); it
was established to prevent tyranny, as a deterrent to tyrannical American
government and also as a reminder of the sacrifice of our forefathers. In my
opinion, those same battle-lines are being drawn today. We each have to decide
where we will stand. I think you know my position.
What i want to know is for all you that say on here that you would us your
gun(s) to defend this that and the other and you all have your CCP. My question
to you is this when a shoot went off at the gun show s ovee rthe weekend how
come it is that all those people with the weapons permits not run to the sound
of the shots in stead of running away? And if we give Teacher's guns will
they do the same? Remember they only have a what two hour class that just makes
me warm all over.
What an excellent letter. I can't agree more. As for those of you
teachers who want to carry a concealed weapon in the classroom, understand--we
know enough about the training your receive to consider it completely
inadequate. We do not trust your training or your temperment. And we are much
more afraid of a cross-fire, with a panicked, undertrained gun wielding teacher
exchanging fire with a lunatic, than we are with the lunatic himself, however
lethal he might be.
The conservatives didn't trust teachers to teach spelling last month but
now feel they are super heroes that should be packing. Let me guess,
they will still not be getting a raise?
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments