The Instigator
BillyTheKids
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
packerman15
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Resolved: It would be beneficial for teachers to have guns at school, in a controlled environment

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/27/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 719 times Debate No: 30759
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

BillyTheKids

Pro

First round is for acceptance
Debate Round No. 1
BillyTheKids

Pro

I believe that guns should be allowed to be held by teachers at school.

First, the teacher would have to have the right amount of training and meet certain requirements before being able to obtain this weapon. I believe that the teachers that have obtained these weapons should have the training of how to use them, so they do not harm any of the people at risk in the process of using such a weapon.

Secondly, the teacher must have the right safety precautions in motion. If they are to keep a fire arm with them, they will not be allowed to have the gun case unlocked any time, unless there is an emergency. Also, if they do unlock the desk there must also be a combination key to the lock on the gun trigger that has an easy set of numbers that the teacher could remember, e.g. their birth year. The school would also have the combination so that if there was a substitute teacher in the class that day, they would also have the combination.

If the teacher had the gun in the classroom with them in an emergency, like the Sandy Hook and Columbine shootings they would be able to shorten some if not all of the death toll that would happen as well as keep a safer environment where the students and teachers would know that they were safer. This could ultimately lead to better grades because the students would feel safer, and there would be less fear through out the day of certain situations happening.

Also, if the teacher felt like they were in a safer environment that would also have an effect on there teaching and could lead to them having a better teaching experience, and a more steady job and income. As well as the teacher may have more of an income because they are protecting their students and the parents might pay more to ensure that there is better protection for their kids.

Overall, if a school were to allow teachers to have weapons in a controlled environment, it would lead to better grades, income and security throughout the school.
packerman15

Con

To stop war you must not make more war. To stop war you must make peace. A teacher having a gun in class wil increase the chances of a school shooting. In no way would it make the school safer. If anything the school should have armed guards trained by the U.S. government. The money that this would cost to train the teacher would raise taxes enormously. Also the cost of the guns and ammo will cost a great amount. The school will have the same amount of fear as a they would have before. Knowing that there is a gun in every classroom. Having a lock would not change the effect. If an intruder come into the school and starts shooting the teacher will not have enough time to take out the gun and shoot. The goal should be to keep intruders out, not stop them when there in the school. Stopping the problem before it happens that is the goal, not stopping it while its happening. That is the goal.
Debate Round No. 2
BillyTheKids

Pro

My opponent states, "If anything the school should have armed guards trained by the U.S. government." but to have a group of people trained by the government of any country and then have them just protect the school, that would cost millions of dollars that would be less effective than just keeping trained teachers have the gun.

Also, my opponent states that having a lock is not going to help effect the safety of the keeping of the gun, however, having two locks, which I stated, would be more effective because first, the student would have to find the key to the desk that only has one other copy, and second, that he would be able to find out what the combination to the second lock would be, therefor, he would not be able to break in, making the locks effective.

He claims that the teacher would not have enough time to take the gun out however, there would be well over 15 teachers with the fire arm, making enough time for the teacher to take out the firearm. It would most likely only take the teacher 5 minutes to take the gun out, and it would most likely take the substitute teacher 10 minutes to take out the firearm, that would be more than enough time for the teacher to prepare themselves for the danger. Even if the teacher has a firearm the school would still have to follow the standard procedure for a lock down. Therefor, the teacher would have enough time to get ready for the danger that is taking place at the moment.

He claims that having a firearm would still keep the same fear in the school, however, he doesn't elaborate, making that argument irrelevant.

He does claim that stopping it before it happens is the goal, but I would like to ask him. How would we be able to stop the threat before it happened? Without knowing where, and when the threat will take place there is no way of stopping it before it happens.

I would like to thank my friend for arguing with me again. Knowing that this is one of your first arguments I will tell you that in this round you are supposed to argue against my opening argument, like I did yours.
packerman15

Con

packerman15 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
BillyTheKids

Pro

BillyTheKids forfeited this round.
packerman15

Con

packerman15 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.