The Instigator
godsnumberis7
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Shadowhuntress
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points

Should school officials be armed

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
Shadowhuntress
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/21/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 785 times Debate No: 55179
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

godsnumberis7

Con

1st round for acceptance
2nd round for main point
3rd rebuttal
4th rebuttal and closing
Debate Round No. 1
godsnumberis7

Con

I do not think that school officials should be armed because It could endanger our kids if they accidentally get a hold of the gun and do something like pull the trigger or take the gun out of the teachers belt. rep. Elaine Schwartz from foxnews.com says," it is truly dangerous to put guns in the hands of people who have access to our schools and authorities without any psychological testing" you might say that well what do you think there not going to get them tested psychologically but what if the teacher goes insane after the testing or secretly doesn't go to the testing.
Shadowhuntress

Pro

Ah. I see that you, like myself, are a student. Imagine, if you're willing, hearing a single announcement on what you thought was an ordinary school day. 'There is an emergency in the building and we must lock down.' Imagine scrambling to the nearest room as you hear the telltale sound. Gunshots.
It's then that you know that the shooter, for the time being, is unstoppable. The police will take a while to respond. For that amount of time, you will be locked in a dark room, with no knowledge of your friends lives, no assurance you will make it through the end of the day.
From 1992-2007, for 323 students (abcnews.com) this wasn't a dream. It was a cold, harsh, reality. They never saw the sun again."
13 died in Columbine (http://www.cnn.com...), one teacher among them. Dave Sanders bled to death on the floor of a classroom, the only teacher to die in Columbine. What if he had been armed? He could have shot the gunmen and lived to return to his wife and kids. 12 students could return to their families."
An Arkansas principle says"The plan we've been given in the past is `Well, lock your doors, turn off your lights and hope for the best,'" (http://m.nydailynews.com......)." And you know it's true. A piece of 'bullet proof' wood held shut with a little stick of metal won't keep out a angry psychopath with a gun."
Teachers cannot re-assure their students of anything. They cannot say 'if worse comes to worse, I can protect you.' Maybe you know karate, or some other self defense method, and that's great. What will you do if a gunman enters your school? Karate chop his gun in half? Good luck.
NRA officials stated 'the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun'.(Http://m.cnsnews.com...) no"matter how biased you claim this to be, we all know it's true. A arrow isn't going to take down a shooter with a AR-15, and we all know it."
There are certain holsters for sale that have built in safety measures to prevent accidents like the ones you mentioned above. Some require the gun-bearer to press a 'button' before drawing the gun, a safety of sorts."
Police are good at what they do. At Sandy Hook, they entered the school in nine minutes (https://www.cpcanet.org...). Nine minutes was fast, but not fast enough. 26 students and teachers died (gunman not included). 6 teachers where victims (http://abcnews.go.com...). What if one of them, just one, had had a gun of their own? I'm not"saying everyone needs to have a gun. Just one or two teachers per school would be psychologically evaluated, trained, and given a gun when they have earned it. Just one or two."
It won't do to outlaw guns. The second amendment protects that right, and we both know trying to overturn part of the constitution will go over as well as banning ice cream. And outlawing something won't mean people can't get a hold of it. If you need proof, just think of all the illegal drugs you can buy on the street right now.
America is already trillions in the hole. Maybe we, the people, can scrap together enough pocket change to do something that will actually matter. After all, a child's life is more valuable than money
Debate Round No. 2
godsnumberis7

Con

well according to huffingtonpost.com there were armed guards at the columbine high school shooting but that didn't stop just 2 kids, just...2...kids from killing 15 kids and wounding 23 others and while yes they were off duty when the shooters came they still shot at the shooters and what good does a gun do if you can't take down the gunman. Now if only 1 or 2 teachers had a gun then what would happen if they both got shot then what huh? They are not going to be stopped. There may not be a police station by schools but by our school there is a security prison probably less than a minute away and that would limit kids getting killed a lot or even to none. Another solution to this problem is we could just put a police station next to the school and that would probably cost about the same amount to give guns to the teachers and is not even the schools money so we could use are money on other things for the school, also most likely were going to have to give the guns to more than 2 teachers. Now you might say that the teacher could lock the gun in the drawer but what if the shooter comes in unexpectedly than it's going to take time for the teacher to unlock the drawer and before the teacher can do it BAMN! the teachers dead and that gives the shooter a better chance of killing more kids. If the shootings on a high school or college campus than that's a pretty big campus and what if there is not a teacher on that side of the campus that has a gun then how are they going to stop the shooter. Now my last and final point, if we spend all that money on guns than were not going to have a lot of money to spend on the children's education which is why we are in school or... is school not for education.
Shadowhuntress

Pro

Your information concerning the death toll of columbine is incorrect. 13 were shot, and then the two shooters killed themselves. They killed 13, not 15. Regarding the armed guards, Columbine was the first real school tragedy of it's kind. Police didn't even know what to do. They could have stopped the shooting, but the key to the fact that they didn't was due to their inaction. Because it is due to their inaction, it makes it irrelevant to this debate.
If the unlikely event where to occur in which all armed officials where shot, then even if they haven't stopped the shooter, they have bought the police time. While there is a prison close to our school, we are not talking only about our school but the entire nation's school. Does every school have a police presence so close? And your saying putting a police station near every school in the country would cost less? Construction costs alone would be in the thousands, plus employment issues and building permits. And this is for every Pre-school, elementary school, middle school and high school in America.
And no, I would not say the gun should be locked in a drawer. As I stated, the gun would be in a safe holster with precautions, on the teacher at all times.
You mentioned that there would be no psychological testing, but that is absurd. Of course teachers would have testing and classes. You mentioned school being for education, but who are you providing education for if your students are all dead?
Debate Round No. 3
godsnumberis7

Con

Now I would like to say that my information was wrong and there was 13 people killed, my mistake.

Doesn't the government already have enough to create a police station next to all the schools and I mean the government already makes us pay lots of taxes but that is another issue for another day.
My opponent said that the gun would be in a holster with the teacher but what if a student overpowers the teacher and steals the gun or the teachers leaning against a desk and then boom! the gun goes off and we could have a teacher with a injured foot which would add to the money situation for the hospital stuff.

Psych tests are not always accurate.
Psychological tests cannot always adequately evaluate whether a teacher should be able to carry a firearm or not. David L. Mount, a professor at Wake Forest School of Medicine, notes that "Just because someone tests one way does not necessarily mean that they are that way. People are made up by a combination of several personality traits. There also is the chance of incorrectly labeling a person. Employers should be aware that there is no hard evidence that personality tests, like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator" test, are accurate measures of one's personality." This shows that psych tests cannot really prove weather a teacher is fit to have a gun or not. There is always a chance that a teacher could misuse their gun privileges and end up hurting a student or colleague.
Even if teachers have good intentions, in the case of student acting up or making threats, paranoia could result in a teacher shooting a student. The repercussions of such an action could be disastrous to the class, the student, and the teacher.
Shadowhuntress

Pro

When the gun is not in use, the safety would be on, preventing it from going off. If the highly unlikely event of a student over powering the teacher, another teacher in the building would be armed, allowing them to shoot the student if need be.
Psych. Testing might not always be accurate, but would you rather a teacher not be tested at all? After extensive searching I have not found a single case where a teacher opened fire on students. This proves that teachers can be trusted in possession of a gun.
In closure, at the beginning of this debate, I asked you to imagine a scenario. Now, I ask you to imagine how that scenario would be different if you knew your teacher held a gun. You know that you'll walk out okay.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by jp_porwisz10 3 years ago
jp_porwisz10
A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
Posted by Shadowhuntress 3 years ago
Shadowhuntress
What?
Posted by godsnumberis7 3 years ago
godsnumberis7
and it's krav maga btw
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cobo 3 years ago
Cobo
godsnumberis7ShadowhuntressTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: A lackluster debate from both sides. Pro started out strong but finished out very weak. I give pro the source point, because the pro actually cited their sources and didn't merely say the name of the organization/newspaper they were citing.