A small American school district in Arkansas recently captured the headlines by attempting to arm 20 volunteer teachers and staff with handguns starting in August 2013. That initiative has simply reignited the North American debate about the best way to protect children and ensure safer schools. The school under the microscope, Clarksville High School, would be the first in the state to take this step under a state law that allows licensed, armed security guards on campus. Teachers in the program would, after undergoing 53 hours of training, function as security guards as well as educators. It’s merely the latest response of school districts to the horrific shooting at Newtown, Connecticut, in December of 2012.
The wave of parental concern after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings prompted Superintendent David Hopkins to re-evaluate the Arkansas district’s school security procedures, even though the town of some 9,200, about 100 miles northwest of Little Rock, is not regarded as unsafe or dangerous. State officials, respecting the Second Amendment (the right to bear arms) and the local law, were remarkably slow to step forward to block the plan. It will likely be aborted because Arkansas School Commissioner Tom Kimbrell favours deploying security officers rather than arming classroom teachers.
Arming teachers remains controversial, even in the American Deep South and Texas. It was proposed by the National Rifle Asociation in the wake of the Sandy Hook school massacre. State bills in Texas and Michigan fell short of passage after generating resistance from leading educators and warnings from insurance companies about the impact on premiums. The cost of supplying weapons ($1,100 per gun) and providing training also proved to be impediments. In spite of those factors, the strategy of deploying guards and arming teachers still has its supporters, especially in rural, conservative-minded American states.
Putting guns in schools strikes most Canadians as totally bizarre, even those living in troubled inner city communities. Speaking on CTV’s Question Period in December 2012, Stu Auty, founder of the Canadian Safe Schools Network
claimed that it was a matter of “weapon availability” as well a continental cultural differences. School shootings like the horrific one in Taber, Alberta, do happen in Canada, he acknowledged, but they tend to involve illegal hand guns rather than high powered assault weapons. Concealing weapons is also still extremely rare on Canadian streets.
Since the 9/11 Security Crisis and the 2005 Dawson College mass shootings, most K to 12 schools have significantly beefed-up security and instituted new internal and external emergency response procedures. Electronic security is visible at school entrances and all doors are locked except the controlled access front entrance. Many big city high schools now have armed police officers on or near the school grounds.
There is a marked difference, however, in the approach taken in Canada to ensure school safety and security. Safe School policies in Canadian school districts have tended to follow and mimic the guidelines promoted by Stu Auty and his Safe Schools Network. Most of the strategy is preventative rather than deterrent, focusing on allieviating the root causes and minimizing the risks of violence in and around the schools. Deploying guns is not part of the strategy and the intent is to keep children safe by ensuring that schools are essentially “weapon-free zones.” It is not unknown for high school students to carry concealed weapons(mostly switch-blades, or knives), but they do so knowing that they are strictly prohibited and aware of the consequences of violating that rule.
What impact can excessive security measures have on schools? Back in December 2012, Doran Horowitz, Director of the Centre for Israel-Jewish Affairs, put it best. “We try to avoid barricaded schools and classrooms,” he told CTV’s Question Period. ” It’s important to avoid adopting the ‘Fort Knox’ mentality in schools.”
Why are American school districts increasingly deploying guns and armed guards in the schools? Is arming teachers a sensible or an effective strategy? Do we know how students react to their teachers when they come to class armed with concealed weapons? Does it create a chill that discourages student engagement in learning? What is really achieved by barricading the classroom and looking upon the outside world with a fearful set of eyes?
Arming teachers is not the way to go. There will be far more innocent people killed.
Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel was so upset by the actions taken by the Clarksville school district that he has registered an August 1, 2013 legal objection to arming teachers:
http://ag.arkansas.gov/opinions/docs/2013-091.html
AG McDaniel is now attempting to block the initiative on the grounds that it is not permitted under state law. Stay tuned for further updates.
How smart is it to arm teachers, train them to kill and then cut their wages? Can’t wait until the next round of contract discussions in that county.
Well, there is also the legal implications to considered…………….one hell of a law suit that teachers packing guns would have to deal with.
The public debate erupted on CNN (July 30, 2013) in a memorable segment – “Piers Morgan on Guns in Arkansas School, It’s the Wild West – How Teachers Confront Adam Lanza? ”
Here’s a little more background:
“Arming Teachers and School Staff with Guns
Implementation Issues Present School Boards and Administrators with Significant Responsibility and Potential Liability”
http://www.schoolsecurity.org/trends/arming_teachers.html
And this from a chat forum –
Let Talk: Arming Public School Teachers With Gun
As parents I have concern regarding arming teachers and staffs with gun.”It would be extremely dangerous to have teachers firing weapons in the classroom.” Even some highly trained law enforcement officers often miss their mark when shooting, and the risk is increased for students finding a gun or a gun accidentally discharging when guns are brought into the school. As a parents I prefer to send my children to an public schoosl, but if school district in my community decide to arm teachers in my children school, it will force me to home school or send my children to private school.. I am okay with teachers having pepper spray.”
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Let-Talk-Arming-Public-School-3728619.S.199851433
Or as my father used to say, more yahoos that cannot shoot and aim the broadside of a barn. In reference to chasing the yahoos from the cities who thought they were hunters off the farm property, and always managed to aimed where us kids were playing. Quite a sight to see, seeing my father holding his own rifle, leading the yahoos off the property who were screaming about their rights to hunt. My father too, would do the same thing, moved the kids to another school, that did not have teachers carrying guns. I would too, seeing that its not a very good environment for children to learn, and more so for their active imaginations of worrying when the teacher is going to go postal.
A troubling stat when there is lots of guns around – “Steve Smith, CEO of AOAV, said: “A country that needs to arm its teachers with concealed firearms in order to protect its children in school, is troubled. Other than the US, no country in the world feels the need to do this. At the height of the “Troubles” in Northern Ireland, members of the Ulster Defence Regiment were armed with personal protection weapons. Only one IRA man was killed by a soldier using such a weapon in self-defence. By contrast, there were numerous fatalities through suicides and accidents. If that was the outcome when providing trained soldiers with concealed weapons, what makes anyone think that arming teachers will have less harmful consequences?”
http://aoav.org.uk/2013/aoav-condemns-the-arming-of-teachers-in-american-public-schools/
The Arkansas Times provided this news report on the AG’s intervention:
Attorney general says school districts can’t arm teachers under private guard law
http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2013/08/01/attorney-general-says-school-districts-cant-arm-teachers-under-private-guard-law
Arming teachers is a live debate in Little Rock, the state capital. Democratic AG Dustiin McDaniel’s intervention has been attacked by his Republican rivals. Supporters of deploying guns in schools are quite adamant in their views.
The Arkansas Times reported that Curtis Coleman, an NRA friendly Republican candidate for Attorney General, “sniffed opportunity” and issued this statement::
“I applaud the Clarksville School District for taking the initiative on campus safety. Giving teachers and staff the choice to take the proper training and act as a volunteer security force to keep our children safe was exactly the appropriate course of action. It is truly unfortunate that as a result of Attorney General Dustin McDaniel’s opinion stating that the Clarksville School District—or any school district in Arkansas for that matter—cannot have this kind of local control, a chilling effect will be placed on future efforts.”
Coleman called for the legislature to pass a law to explicitly allow local option on guns and promised to lead the effort, generally, to loosen state grip on local schools.
http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2013/08/01/shootdont-shoot-the-politics-of-arming-school-staff
What can we deduce? The NRA continues to hold sway in Arkansas politics.
Ridding schools of external threats and concealed weapons need not mean investing more in security. One troubled American inner city school, Orchard Gardens School in Roxbury, Mass, has adopted a radically different strategy – investing the funds previously spent on security in a specialized, enhanced arts education program:
Deterrent strategies were not working at Orchard Gardens School. Opened in 2003 as a state-of-the art high security building, the school had five principals in its first seven years and a 50% turnover in its teaching staff. Since 2010, under new leadership, the Roxbury School invested heavily in arts education with encouraging results. It no longer has “the feel of a prison.” The key question – is it scalable? How much of the turnaround is the result of visionary, committed school leadership and staff solidarity in pursuit of a focused mission?
One defensive move I can see is giving each classroom a reinforced steel door with a couple of strong dead bolt locks. They can be painted with flowers or happy faces so long as they are bullet proof and very difficult to open. It is not alienating. It is very cheap compared to security guards and far less dangerous than armed school staff. It could be seen as an infrastructure, stimulus project making jobs in the steel and construction industry which has the multiplier effect.
If a mad gun-person is loose in the school, the lockdown order would be a real safety feature.
If you did this in every school I’m sure a student will figure out how to steal one of the guns and then you might have some real problems. I understand they’re trying to protect their school, I just don’t know if this is the most correct way.
Just a note to my reform friends, Charters schools in NYC had a totally disasterous round of test results including KIPP, scoring well below the NYC average in the Common Core tests pushed by Chester Finn et al.
The reform myth of excellence through choice just went up in smoke.