An attacker is never one of my students.
February 22, 2019 7:39 PM   Subscribe

I start to think in terms of students and attackers. The training encourages this result. Everything about its vocabulary is designed to dehumanize our aim. The instructors’ military language—“soft targets” and “areas of operation” for schools, “threats” for shooters, “tactical equipment” for guns—rubs off. On the final day, a pep talk analogizes students with lambs. We are the sheepdogs, charged with protecting them from the wolves.
posted by bitmage (29 comments total) 11 users marked this as a favorite
 
i was going to say that we'll just have to let this experiment play out. That surely once it is obvious that this is not an effective plan, then obviously we will see where the problem really is. I was going to say that, but then I remembered that I said the same thing about Trickle Down Economics 40 years ago.
posted by ambulocetus at 9:46 PM on February 22, 2019 [5 favorites]


I cannot even begin to fathom why, except in the name of the Gary Cooper/Grace Kelly fantasy land called out in Die Hard, that anyone would think that arming educators is a fine idea. The only ones I know who'd go for it hard are the history teachers. Everyone else would be reluctant at best. And that's before you stop to think about how poorly professionals in the field of returning fire do despite that being a daily expectation.

It's all a damn fantasy, a deluded dream in search of being a solution.
posted by drewbage1847 at 11:34 PM on February 22, 2019 [8 favorites]


Sorry outside of the edit window - the other thing that's infuriating about this - it's another burden placed on our teachers. So much of the discussion being a teacher rolls around to the moral aspects of you're sacrificing your earning potential, your happiness, your stress level, etc in favor of doing the best for the kids to make a better future. Now you want to add being their sheepdog protector on top of it?!? I just don't have the diction to properly, accurately and powerfully express my anger about this

Teaching is a noble profession. It is, in our modern American system, a completely unfairly , overburdened system. How much of that rolls up to it still being largely viewed as a "woman's job", I'll leave to the reader. But both my mom and my wife left the field this year - my mom after 35ish years and my after 15 - both driven out by the stress and bullshit that lays outside of teaching itself.

We need to let teachers be teachers and not taint it with all this extra crap - which is a futile wish, I know.
posted by drewbage1847 at 11:49 PM on February 22, 2019 [37 favorites]


I love the idea of teacher’s being an armed authority figure to show kids they must respect and fear authority, because the penalty could be death.

Did I say I love? I meant I hate. This is so many shades of awful.
posted by [insert clever name here] at 12:03 AM on February 23, 2019 [14 favorites]


This is a resoundingly wrong turn for a society not engaged in an active, shooting war, to take.
posted by From Bklyn at 1:01 AM on February 23, 2019 [3 favorites]


I gasped when I read that the school district would provide hollow-pointed bullets. My understanding was (and the article states) that the main purpose of hollow-pointing a bullet is to make it cause more damage in the target, and I know that it is illegal to use hollow-pointed bullets in warfare. However, apparently the way that hollow-pointed bullets change shape upon impact makes them less likely to ricochet, and police departments prefer them for this reason.

I feel strongly that programs like this one will end more lives than they save, and will ruin more lives than they end.
posted by fantabulous timewaster at 1:43 AM on February 23, 2019 [7 favorites]




Stuff like this makes A Clockwork Orange look less and less comparatively dystopian. I mean, Anthony Burgess didn't arm teachers in it, IIRC.
posted by CheesesOfBrazil at 4:41 AM on February 23, 2019 [1 favorite]


The only ones I know who'd go for it hard are the history teachers.

I am sorry that you’ve had such poor experiences with history teachers.
posted by nickmark at 5:19 AM on February 23, 2019 [14 favorites]


This is another attack on education and making the classroom a direct extension of a police state. May we overcome.
posted by childofTethys at 5:46 AM on February 23, 2019 [4 favorites]


Yeah, I really want to unpack that history teacher thing....
posted by amanda at 6:54 AM on February 23, 2019 [2 favorites]


I don't want to speak for anyone else, but in my public schooling experience, the history teachers were all reactionary conservatives.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 7:13 AM on February 23, 2019 [14 favorites]


This is probably a tangent, but in a police setting hollowpoints make sense in that when the police is shooting someone, they need to take that person down fast, from the theory that the only persons police shoot at are those that constitute a clear and present danger to their surroundings. Shooting them with something less "optimal" will actually put more lives at risk. In addition those kinds of bullets tend to ricochet and over-penetrate less.

The military calculation is a lot different. There you want the person you're shooting at out of the game, but you would actually prefer for them not to die, so that they are a drain on their side's resources while being evacuated, treated, rehabilitated etc.

All that being said, the very idea of arming teachers feels so very, very wrong from my decadent European viewpoint.
posted by Harald74 at 7:35 AM on February 23, 2019 [8 favorites]


A great essay from Stonekettle: Stand and Teach

"So, you’re going to have a certain degree of paranoia and detachment.

"Is that the mindset you want in a classroom?

"Is that really the mindset you want in a teacher? One where they must regard all children as potential threats, potential enemies, potential targets? Where they must be prepared to kill children at any moment? Imagine where that goes over the long term, that siege mentality – hell, you don’t have to imagine it, look at your increasingly militarized police departments."
posted by MonkeyToes at 7:45 AM on February 23, 2019 [6 favorites]


The only ones I know who'd go for it hard are the history teachers.

If only for the opportunity to put on sunglasses and say “Those who don’t learn from history *PUMPS SHOTGUN* are doomed to repeat it.”
posted by dr_dank at 8:07 AM on February 23, 2019 [16 favorites]


This was a good essay. I was at first a bit inclined to dislike the rhetorical flourishes but I think they do a good job of conveying the writer's perspective on events. For what it's worth, anticipating recoil is not a "sign of timidity" and is not perceived as such by anyone I've ever worked or trained with, including people with multiple combat deployments with the Army Special Forces and Army and Marine infantry. It's a very common thing that people do and is one of the many instinctual responses that have to be suppressed in order to accurately shoot a firearm. Loading a pistol with dummy rounds or fired cartridges is a common training technique help the student be aware of what they're doing. I think the writer's experience of this issue was almost certainly exacerbated by an uncorrected problem with their grip; you shouldn't be getting blisters regardless of how many rounds you fire. It's the same as getting blisters on a hike, that's way too much movement. If it hurts every time you pull the trigger I can't imagine that you wouldn't start to anticipate it.

Educators in the US are undeniably just in a bad spot. It's simply not possible to harden every potential target in a free society. Schools, concerts, professional and hobby conventions, malls, busy workplaces, bars, the list is endless. If I were in charge of training educators and administration to carry firearms at school I don't think I would emphasize day to day vigilance, checking students for signs of firearms, etc. I would concentrate solely and specifically on Columbine/Sandy Hook/Parkland scenarios. Is someone actively and methodically stalking from room to room and murdering helpless victims? If yes, do your best to stop them. If not, put it out of your mind. Ideally none of the students and nearly none of your coworkers will know you're carrying. As a side benefit this also does away with worries about, I dunno, teachers as armed authority figures or whatever. And it does seem like this is the model the writer's school was using.

I have my doubts that a single teacher or administrator will reliably be able to stop a Lanza-style shooter, but it's probably not worse than simply using your body to soak up bullets like Aaron Feis? I would expect the kind of average "good" outcome to be basically that both the shooter and the teacher would be killed in the exchange.

We just kind of have bad choices in the U.S. As I've said before I do believe we could come very close to eliminating these incidents with the repeal of the 2nd amendment, but of course that's not really a political possibility. So in the meantime you have to address the practical reality that any nutcase might decide to attack his local elementary school. I've been within 30 feet of a triple shooting on a crowded street but between the fact that I was facing the other way when the shooting started and then the general chaos of shooting scenes even though I was already there with multiple other officers we still didn't get the shooter. It's even less likely that police will arrive in time to bring a meaningful halt to the next school shooter.
I gasped when I read that the school district would provide hollow-pointed bullets. My understanding was (and the article states) that the main purpose of hollow-pointing a bullet is to make it cause more damage in the target, and I know that it is illegal to use hollow-pointed bullets in warfare. However, apparently the way that hollow-pointed bullets change shape upon impact makes them less likely to ricochet, and police departments prefer them for this reason.
This is not especially accurate. Hollow points are not mentioned in the Geneva Conventions, and their prohibition in the Hague Convention of 1899 doesn't really carry any weight today. They're simply not relevant on modern battlefields. Modern military ammunition is concerned about things like getting through armor and cover and is almost exclusively rifle ammunition. Hollow points are primarily used to increase the effectiveness of low-velocity pistol ammunition. High velocity rifle ammunition does not need to sacrifice flight ballistics for terminal effects. There is no ricochet-related reason I'm personally aware of behind police use of them. They just work better at stopping people. They're also not restricted to police, anyone that can legally own a firearm can purchase HP ammunition.
posted by firebrick at 12:41 PM on February 23, 2019 [12 favorites]


So, as per Trump Jr, teachers are losers who deserve no respect, but should be trained to carry concealed.
posted by ocschwar at 1:35 PM on February 23, 2019 [1 favorite]


The teachers probably have buy their own guns, as well as art supplies.
posted by MtDewd at 2:55 PM on February 23, 2019 [4 favorites]


This is one of those developments that I have trouble processing at all. It's so ridiculous and so terrible in every way.

For what it's worth, I've read years ago in (I believe) a New York Times story a justification for police use of hollow points, under debate in the late 1990s. They supposedly are less likely than jacketed bullets to pass through a person and then hit another person and are less likely to hurt someone if they ricochet off a sidewalk or building. But even that claim was under debate. Also, because hollow points do more damage (good if you want "stopping power") you'd better be sure you have shot the person you want to stop and that stopping that person is the best available option. I'm not sure that many people, even with training, can kill other people in a crowded, chaotic situation without serious mistakes happening. And I'm not sure killing people is the best available way to solve all but the rarest of problems.
posted by zenzenobia at 3:27 PM on February 23, 2019 [1 favorite]


The only ones I know who'd go for it hard are the history teachers.

As a history teacher who is married to a history teacher and who knows a lot of history teachers in Texas, I don't know a single one of us who wants anything to do with arming teachers. For one thing, at least in my department, we are among the most progressive people in the school (at least based upon arguments I've been part of at work). And for another, I feel like we are pretty aware of the political theater that goes on with these kinds of initiatives.

Obviously every campus has its own culture, but I feel like your experience is possibly the outlier. I mean, the theme for this year's NCSS conference is "Informed Action: Agency, Advocacy, Activism."
posted by usedsongs at 3:42 PM on February 23, 2019 [8 favorites]


It's honestly ridiculous that we're even discussing it, it's uninsurable. Schools looked into it after Sandy Hook; it's uninsurable. And teachers, not being cops, aren't protected by the statutes that provide cops immunity in many situations so that cities aren't sued out of existence when their cops shoot. Schools can't afford it. Guns are uninsurably dangerous, when you're allowed to sue about them, and that's why gun manufacturers have had tort liability protection written into the law, because they couldn't operate otherwise.

Most insurers in my state flatly said if teachers were concealed-carrying (such as if the legislature passed a law allowing that without insurance), they'd pull the school's insurance for everything else -- slip & falls, sports injuries, all of it. Insurers won't touch it, districts can't afford to self-insure, and state won't fund education right NOW, they have no interest in funding it when they also have to cover liability for teachers carrying guns.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:26 PM on February 23, 2019 [17 favorites]


Are these the same schools that wouldn't let me bake cookies for parties back in the day? We were following rules about food allergies and diabetes, and about children giving in to temptation or not wanting to appear different than their classmates....
And yet, let the students know that there is the potential of firearms and ammunition within the classroom, even carried by school personnel? Yeah, that's fine.
I don't have a problem with security guards (I pulled a knife out of a student's gym shoe during morning backpack search -- middle school substitute teacher). But I do have a problem with a teacher assuming one more role during the school day. Teaching is stressful enough, let's not add "armed and dangerous" to the mix.
posted by TrishaU at 6:52 PM on February 23, 2019


aside from the general stupidity of this (risk of accident, unfairness to teachers, rights of children, etc..), i dont think marksmanship training alone is helpful. being able to hit a paper target doesnt address the fear factor of being in a gunfight, let alone a gunfight with someone who may be suicidal. arming teachers is fucking nuts. imagine the crossfire and how many injuries could result once both sides take cover and start shooting at each other with little kids everywhere.
posted by wibari at 9:24 PM on February 23, 2019


It seems to me that arming teachers is built upon the increasingly militaristic trend in law enforcement. I can't reconcile what I know about being in combat (half a century ago), and a policeman's duty to protect and serve. My operational theory was to Search and Destroy, not Protect and Serve, if you see what I mean. As a soldier I counted "collateral damage" (unintended civilian casualties) as a somtimes by-product of war. Like, when you get RPD fire from the village, you send a few artillery rounds into to calm everybody down before you and your brothers walk into it.

I am certain that sooner or later collateral damage will occur when students are caught in a crossfire between a teacher and some deranged child. I was moved my Mr. Hampikian's essay. I am temporarily comforted by his transition to a responsible handgun carrier, because I believe he'll handle his weapon properly. I dread the day when he discovers the visceral difference between shooting a human and a paper target. I truly hope this eventuality, if it comes to pass, doesn't involve anybody he knows. I promise you that all the comfort he may get from believing he saved some lives during that gunfight will be suspended at night when he lays himself down to sleep, and the movie just keeps looping and looping. At lunch he may find himself staring into a coffee cup while the concussions he experienced during the gunfight snap into his daydream. He'll stand firm in his belief that he helped save some lives--this won't help him, though. The dead child will be what his heart takes away from the experience, not the potential killer he shot to death.

People will argue whether or not this was worth it, and they'll likely pat him on the back and tell him he was a hero. But that part will actually be forever lost to him.

My tangent for the day:
I still don't believe the trend of militarizing out police forces is in the best interest of our country. I definitely believe that, with certain exceptions, guns have no place in a school. For example, my junior high school had a rifle team. The school (Washington Jr High--Yay Toads) supplied us with a dozen match-grade .22 rifles, and we had a firing range in a basement under our auditorium, where we practiced every Friday after school. Nobody worried about shooters then. The most dangerous among us might carry a knife to school if they were clever enough to keep it out of sight. Some guys, wishing to be armed, just in case, carried rat-tail combs. I guess geezerhood has put me out of step with this dangerous new order of things.
posted by mule98J at 8:44 AM on February 24, 2019 [3 favorites]


We are the sheepdogs, charged with protecting them from the wolves.

I'm from Canada, where there is stricter gun control than in the U.S. (Canada still has 10X gun fatalities per capita compared to the U.K., though).

I have a university friend who has lived in Dallas-Fort Worth for more than twenty years. He's bought into the gun culture down there. On Facebook a few years ago he posted a blog or forum post by an American gun nut who felt utterly unprotected on a trip to Canada after he was forced to leave his guns behind.

My university friend agreed with the gun nut's paranoia: "we are the sheepdogs, protecting everyone from the wolves", denigrating those of us who choose to live without guns: "somebody else is putting their life on the line to protect you."

A thoroughly frightening and insane way to look at the world, with no concept for civil society whatsoever.

We are no longer friends.
posted by JamesBay at 3:52 PM on February 24, 2019 [5 favorites]


I have my doubts that a single teacher or administrator will reliably be able to stop a Lanza-style shooter, but it's probably not worse than simply using your body to soak up bullets like Aaron Feis? I would expect the kind of average "good" outcome to be basically that both the shooter and the teacher would be killed in the exchange.

Good heavens, are you serious? The instance of an armed teacher confronting a mass shooter is literally one in a million, and in exchange you put loaded guns in thousands of classrooms. Even if we assume all teachers are perfect saints, and would never use a gun for anything except this idealized instance, are you familiar with children? They grab and play with things that do not belong to them. Basically constantly. You know the body language cops use when dealing with a suspect? One hand covering the weapon, weapon side turned away from the suspect, other hand extended to keep the suspect at bay? Image having your teacher doing that body language throughout the day, as they try to walk between desks, bend over a student's paper, turn their back to the class while writing on the board...

The biggest issue here is not whether the teachers will win a gunfight with an armed student, it is the thousands of teachers carrying guns for their entire careers without ever once being in a situation that is improved by the presence of guns.
posted by agentofselection at 1:09 PM on February 25, 2019 [4 favorites]


My university friend agreed with the gun nut's paranoia: "we are the sheepdogs, protecting everyone from the wolves", denigrating those of us who choose to live without guns: "somebody else is putting their life on the line to protect you."

The rhetorical violence in their statements is very disturbing indeed, as these self-same people are often the wolves they claim to protect us from.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 2:25 PM on February 25, 2019 [4 favorites]


Kitty Stardust, indeed. It reminds me of the old gangster movie type protection racket. "This is a nice place you got here, It'd be a shame if something were to happen to it."
posted by ambulocetus at 9:22 PM on February 25, 2019 [1 favorite]


When You Give A Teacher A Gun - "The question is no longer "should we arm teachers?" Now, it's "how many armed teachers are already out there?" We flew down to Ohio to embed with the men and women behind FASTER Saves Lives, a group that has trained thousands of teachers from all across the country how to shoot to kill."

Children Of Color Already Face Violent Discipline In Schools. Arming Teachers Will Get Them Killed
posted by the man of twists and turns at 3:42 PM on February 28, 2019 [1 favorite]


« Older A busy week in space   |   Peter Sjöstedt-H on Mind, Panpsychism, Philosophy... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments