Fairview allowing armed teachers

Fairview allowing armed teachers

Posted in the West Plains Forum

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Dennis K

Ava, MO

#1 Mar 25, 2013
I am all for protection of our children, however this is a bad idea. A uniformed, trained, experienced officer is a much better deterent.
Having a history with the school district, I have to wonder why the administration did not want a police officer around their school..........
PishPosh

Cabool, MO

#2 Mar 25, 2013
It is as stupid as back in the day when West Plains used to have community awareness meetings to point out possible gang activity! LMAO
seriously

Houston, MO

#5 Mar 25, 2013
The joke is going to be when a military Dad or Mom comes home and go to that school for a function and want to carry. They will be told they can't. As a military person myself (10yrs+) I would ask why? They would say our teachers have had 40 hrs training and I would laugh and say I have been in the military for over 80,000 hrs so I guess my over 30,000 hrs training with a weapon is not good enough? All I can say is it would not be a pretty conversation.
derekp

Ozark, MO

#6 Mar 26, 2013
The problem with arming hillbillies is you must arm them all or it isn't sporting.
Good Ole Boy

Cherokee Village, AR

#7 Mar 26, 2013
Remember when we had hunting rifles and shot guns on gun rack of pickup parked in school parking lot. We were raised that guns were only for hunting.
so you know

Forsyth, MO

#8 Mar 26, 2013
Just a heads up.... several schools are in the process of doing this. Fairview just beat them to it.
BTW... WP R-7 isn't one of them.
Dennis K

Ava, MO

#9 Mar 26, 2013
Someone judged my comment as clueless. I find that almost funny if it was not so pathetic. Time will be the judge. This is a bad idea, a very bad idea.
Dennis K

Ava, MO

#10 Mar 26, 2013
so you know wrote:
Just a heads up.... several schools are in the process of doing this. Fairview just beat them to it.
BTW... WP R-7 isn't one of them.
I would guess you are one profiting from this.
Religious Zealot

Ozark, MO

#12 Mar 26, 2013
Sheild Solushuns LLC wrote:
I would want to see a thorough, independent psychological exam of the instructors of Shield Solutions LLC, I don't believe they all could pass it. Most teachers I know, at the elementary level, aren't exactly all there either. 40 hours at a range and classroom and some fake course and certification will not change that. What will happen when other teachers want to be on the Shield Solutions staff, but aren't allowed for some bullshit reason? If they are qualified to be a teacher, why can't the be on Shield Solutions armed staff? What happens when another group of mercenaries that aren't part of the Shield Solutions scheme put together their own security force for market competition? Will a school be allowed to have teachers from several competing security staffs, or will contracts only be for one company that has the most friends of the most school board members? Will there be a bidding process? Will there be some public announcement and discussion about which security "firm" is "hired" to employ teachers within the school? Is this like having vending machines in the school or contracting the cafeteria to multiple parties? As they say, there would be too many cooks in the kitchen, or in this case, too many guns of different calibers. Too many unanswered questions...when they start dealing with school districts that aren't part of their click, you're going to see a mess. Accidental misfirings, ineptness, or a crazed teacher that was fired going off are going to happen, and Shield Solutions, School Boards, and Missouri United School Insurance Council will be on the hook for this foolishness.
Why did God give ignorant people access to a computer? I'm questioning my faith at this very moment.

Since: Feb 12

West Plains, MO

#13 Mar 26, 2013
Shield Solutions was formed in January 2013 by a guy who runs a pawn shop. Now in two short months they have become world class firearm instructors.

What a joke.
babe

Ozark, MO

#14 Mar 26, 2013
Dennis K wrote:
I am all for protection of our children, however this is a bad idea. A uniformed, trained, experienced officer is a much better deterent.
Having a history with the school district, I have to wonder why the administration did not want a police officer around their school..........
Why pay a retired officer $30,000 + benefits for nine months work, when you can have several well trained teachers that are already on site for 10% or less? The liability insurer has no problem with these arrangements, so why have a uniformed Gestapo on site to intiminate the students? Ya'll act like the concealed carriers will be the nut cases, when they are the ones who could easily slip into the school and shoot it up if you did have an officer there....

You should be worried about the other schools where the psyco's will hit next, because it will not be Fairview.
Dennis K

Ozark, MO

#15 Mar 28, 2013
So babe you are saying your children are not worth the cost of a 30K/year police officer? The insurer has no problem with these arrangements? Then why is every other school asked about this saying insurance is a problem? A uniformed Gestapo??? Not sure how to respond to that except maybe if you feel that way about police officers in general there must be a reason.

The object here should be protection of your children. Prevention is the first goal and you do that with visible deterrents, not with staff hiding guns inside the building. God forbid there is ever another issue at any school, but if there is, the first goal should be to keep it outside and away from the kids. What you have done at Fairview is invite them in. "Here we are, somewhere inside amoung the children, come on in and find us, bring the fight to us, we are right here along with the children we are teaching."

A uniformed officer know to be there, patrolling the premises, with one mission is a much better way to approach safety. If you beleive arming teachers is a better option, you are truly delusional.

Fairview has failed to enhance safety, they have in fact degraded it. Why? Because they do not want to spend the money? They do not want a police officer around? I do not know but whatever the reason, it defies logic and further endangers the children at Fairview. My children went to Fairview years ago but if they were still young enough to be there, I would move them even if I had to relocate.
HRMM

Hollister, MO

#16 Mar 28, 2013
problem with insurance?? Then what insurance company would insure a bunch of armed teachers in a school with CHILDREN?? That has got to be WAY expensive. I call bull
babe

Ozark, MO

#17 Mar 28, 2013
Dennis K wrote:
So babe you are saying your children are not worth the cost of a 30K/year police officer? The insurer has no problem with these arrangements? Then why is every other school asked about this saying insurance is a problem? A uniformed Gestapo??? Not sure how to respond to that except maybe if you feel that way about police officers in general there must be a reason.
The object here should be protection of your children. Prevention is the first goal and you do that with visible deterrents, not with staff hiding guns inside the building. God forbid there is ever another issue at any school, but if there is, the first goal should be to keep it outside and away from the kids. What you have done at Fairview is invite them in. "Here we are, somewhere inside amoung the children, come on in and find us, bring the fight to us, we are right here along with the children we are teaching."
A uniformed officer know to be there, patrolling the premises, with one mission is a much better way to approach safety. If you beleive arming teachers is a better option, you are truly delusional.
Fairview has failed to enhance safety, they have in fact degraded it. Why? Because they do not want to spend the money? They do not want a police officer around? I do not know but whatever the reason, it defies logic and further endangers the children at Fairview. My children went to Fairview years ago but if they were still young enough to be there, I would move them even if I had to relocate.
My kids go to Richards where I wish there were ten armed teachers instead of the limp-wristed truent officer there... I do not want uniformed civilian troops(Police) guarding my children, not even one. I am absolutly not delusional to know that if one of the ten armed teachers suddenly went on a shooting rampage as you fear, that the other nine would stop it before your Barney Fife could. And at much lower price than adding another govt paid employee...

For you to say that my: "children are not worth the cost of a 30K/year police officer", shows that maybe you have abnormalities of certain areas of the brain which may be involved in the development of delusional disorders.
Medgirl

Branson, MO

#18 Mar 28, 2013
About time the good guys are ARMED great idea all schools should do this...
babe

Ozark, MO

#19 Mar 28, 2013
HRMM wrote:
problem with insurance?? Then what insurance company would insure a bunch of armed teachers in a school with CHILDREN?? That has got to be WAY expensive. I call bull
research it, who the "sexual intercourse" cares what you call? Then you can reply: sorry, I was a dumbazz...
Dennis K

Ozark, MO

#20 Mar 29, 2013
Babe, you obviously cannot have a thoughtful debate without attempting to make things personal. That is a common tactic, when you cannot make a rational, logical case.
I never suggested one of the teachers would go on a shooting rampage, that is a poor attempt at diversion on your part. Your use of "limp wristed" and "Barney Fife" only shows your lack of ability to articulate anything without the use of slang and derogatory language, again a common tactic when you cannot support your stance.
I am simply not interested in a personal insult war with you, it is not constructive.
I believe what Fairview has done is the wrong approach to a complex issue for many reasons, only some of which I have stated. it is a knee jerk reaction influenced by local politics and not in the best interest of the welfare of the students.
If you wish to have a real thoughtful debate, I stand ready. My case is solid. However if all you want is a war of slang, insults and diversion off topic, I refuse to participate.
babe

Ozark, MO

#21 Mar 29, 2013
Dennis K wrote:
Babe, you obviously cannot have a thoughtful debate without attempting to make things personal. That is a common tactic, when you cannot make a rational, logical case.
I never suggested one of the teachers would go on a shooting rampage, that is a poor attempt at diversion on your part. Your use of "limp wristed" and "Barney Fife" only shows your lack of ability to articulate anything without the use of slang and derogatory language, again a common tactic when you cannot support your stance.
I am simply not interested in a personal insult war with you, it is not constructive.
I believe what Fairview has done is the wrong approach to a complex issue for many reasons, only some of which I have stated. it is a knee jerk reaction influenced by local politics and not in the best interest of the welfare of the students.
If you wish to have a real thoughtful debate, I stand ready. My case is solid. However if all you want is a war of slang, insults and diversion off topic, I refuse to participate.
This is YOUR QUOTE: "A uniformed officer know to be there, patrolling the premises, with one mission is a much better way to approach safety. If you beleive arming teachers is a better option, you are truly delusional."

Now who started the insults, fukwad? And you have no say in our schools, since your children are not in them... So I'm glad you are finished commenting, fool !!
Viper

Forsyth, MO

#22 Mar 30, 2013
Just read through these posts and I have to say Dennis K crushed babe on every turn. I do not really care about the topic but as for the debate, Dennis K clearly made his case while babe came off like a rambling idiot without a clue. It was funny to read.

Since: Feb 12

West Plains, MO

#23 Mar 30, 2013
How much did the training cost? How much is the ongoing cost, including the insurance, which I bet doesn't even exist. Anyone remember the school shooting that happened with Ronald Reagan was the president? Some guy got out of his van and hide behind a storage building and shot a bunch of kids while they were outside at recess. How much good would the Fairview teaches be in a case like that.......none, nada, zero. They might shoot back after the fact and hit each other or more children is the most likely outcome. This is not about safety for the children. This is just 100% about making money off of the tragedy at Sandy Hook. Connect the dots....Robby Crites, Robby Crites old deputies, Martin on the board, Martin on doing the training. They think that people are too dumb to see this. Evidently they are right.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

West Plains Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Missouri ... (Oct '10) 18 min HELLary Clinton 666 105,906
Sugar daddy's in west plains 1 hr andy 2
King Garden Buffet? (Dec '10) 9 hr TheSilentMinority 129
Mistress in town 11 hr Zsazsa 48
Dr. That will still prescripbe pain meds? 11 hr Liberty 7
Anyone know Ashlee driver? 11 hr Just curious 1
Officer Boyle 13 hr Pepper 1

West Plains Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

West Plains Mortgages