Should teachers be allowed firearms in schools?
If teachers were allowed firearms in school (and had the proper instruction), schools could be much safer from intrusion, and could safe money for not having officers at school, except when needed.
Good luck to my opponent. This round, make your opening statement/rebuttal, the final round is the conclusion round.
Teachers are human beings.
Human beings suffer from many kinds of behavior issues.
Human beings are irrational, superstitious, and emotional beings. They can suffer from depression. They can suffer from moments of rage. They can suffer from mental illness. They can lose their tempers. They make mistakes. They make poor judgement decisions. Teacher aren't exempt from any of these human behavior and decision issues.
The notion of the premis falsely assumes that teachers are more reliabe then the general public. Arming teachers, to protect students from the ills of human behavior, while they themselves suffer from the ills of human behavior is poor reasoning. You are inviting in greater risk. We can clearly see with the mass shooting in the United States, that to many of our citizens are irresponsible when it comes to gun ownership. Simply assuming a teacher is somehow exempt from this has no justification.
As a parent, I don't want my children in a room with anyone who has a gun. Trust no one is my motto. Why should I have to send my child to a tax payer funded school, where a teacher I don't know, have never met, have no idea of their mental state is in the same room as my child and that teacher is armed? I didn't constent to this. My child could be in greater danger from the teacher than outside sources. This oversteps parental rights. If the teacher harms my child with the gun, I'm going to sue and bankrupt the school district. If you are so concerned with your child in school, lock them in the house. Don't let them go outside, if you are that afraid. But that is your fear to deal with. Don't make it mine.
Teachers can have bad days just like anyone else. Their students can upset them. Their spouse may have just left them. Maybe the principle is giving them a hard time. Maybe they have a brain tumor growing which will effect their judgement. Maybe they are battling a mental health issue. Do we really want a gun sitting in their top drawer with 30 children, one of them yours, in the room? No.
If America society has gotten to the point where we have to arm teacher, then America is a failure. If it has gotten that bad, then we should fix society, not compond the problem by adding more weapons to it.
Pro gun slogan. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." Yes, that is correct. People kill people. Teachers are people. Why give people who kill people, weapons that make it easier for people to kill people? People kill people, that is why you don't give them weapons.
Think bigger. Desire better. Demand better. No teacher should be allowed firearms around children who are not their own. This is a violation of partental rights and componding of a problem.
Within the past several years, we have seen an increase in school violence, with examples being the Sandy Hook shooting, and the more recent F.S.U shooting (more instances can be found here: http://everytown.org... ) . Imagine if teachers or administrative staff had said firearms, they could have prevented said catastrophe, protecting the kid you love, and preventing the taking of a young, innocent life.
Also, it has been proven teachers having firearms within the classroom can be a substantial 'support unit', as shown by the potential Sullivan Central school shooting in 2010, with an administrator of the school subduing the gunman. (found here: http://www.tricities.com... )
As for mental issues, everyone has the potential for faults in a lifetime, even you. Teachers are no different from other humans, and that is a fact. However, it cannot be ignored that teachers are there to educate the next generation, not to murder them. They might have 'off-day's', like everyone else, but that doesn't mean they can't be trusted with a gun. In fact, several teachers do own a gun for activities such as hunting, or even own one for protection. Why not in their classroom?
You asked the question, "why not in the classroom?" Because it is added danger. I've made that case. Also, as a parent, I don't consent to placing my child in a room, with a person I don't know well, who has a weapon. Why on Earth would I do that?
I would like to discuss your second paragraph. We cannot predict what our school system would look like with guns sitting in desk drawers. But lets think about that for a moment.
1. We must not assume it would look just as it does now. Instead of a shooter coming into the school, we can have that ready made inside the school, since the school now has guns in it. A teacher could have a bad day, of some variety, and decide to harm others with the gun you have permitted inside the school. You have agreed teachers are no different from other people.
2. Maybe a student finds the gun. Children make poor decisions frequently. Now maybe a student gets the teachers gun and harms others, lawsuit and bankrupcy.
3. We shouldn't assume the teacher will actually impact the act of an outside shooter. Maybe the teacher accomplishes nothing. Greater chance of harm brought in, for no reward.
4. Maybe the teacher does act in someway. But the teacher accidentally shoots students while trying to protect them. Lawsuit, and bankrupcy on the way.
5. Multiple teachers with guns, plus an outside shooter. In a confusing and chaotic situation, rounds could be flying in all directions. Teacher shooting student might occur. Teacher shooting teacher might occur.
You cannot assume, with guns in the classroom nothing changes. It is an assumption to think the status quo remains, and the only difference occurs when outside shooters are present. It is very reasonable to think that more guns in schools will bring more shootings in schools.
Still second paragraph. Your quote, "...they could have prevented said catastrophe, protecting the kid you love, and preventing the taking of a young life." Sure that could happen. What is the probablity of that happening though? If the probablility is very low, then the risk will out way a very unlikely event. Your senario is a fictional prediction of possibilities. So let me give you a fictional prediction of possibilities as well. Lets say we have a teacher who brings a gun to school for the reasons you cite. This teacher is going through a hostile divorce. The divorce has brought economic hardship. The teacher begins suffering from depression. One day, he is having a particularly bad day. Students upset him. His rational mind leaves for a moment. He grabs the gun you suggest he take to school, and starts shooting. What you suggest may happen. What I suggest may happen. Which is more likely is the true question? Now imagine your policy on a nation level. Guns in every room. This increases the probablity of my event happening over your event.
You have agreed that teachers are no more responsible than your average person. This doesn't grant them access to kids while the human teacher has a gun.
Back to you Pro
Ninety-two school shootings in 2014 alone, as shows my first reference link, meaning thousands of potential lives lost due to gun violence in a public vicinity, the one place we expect children to be safe: school. Although I stated fictional scenarios, as well as factual, it cannot be ignored teachers have taken a stand with a gun, protecting student lives.
Also, the manipulation of my words: with proper training were my exact. No sane human being would allow a teacher with a gun without the correct and proper training. As I have stated before: I am not a parent, and I do not intend to be one for many years to come, but, even I recognize the issues. Crime in the school systems all over the United States has increased drastically over the past years, one cannot ignore that. Do we expect the next generation to head to a supposed 'safe' environment when more and more insane criminals pop up? No.
We should train and arm these teachers while we can. Someone at a school environment should be ready and armed to fend off intruders, and those someones are the teachers. Not every school has a resource officer, or some form of a safe room, even the schools who do: they aren't necessarily the 'best' in modern technology.
In conclusion, a teacher with a firearm in school would; help protect the next generation of children from danger, preventing the loss of several innocent lives, and help with a sense of extra security in school! I rest my case, Con, back to you.
Thanks for the debate Pro
1. Training has no impact on the mental state of a person. A teacher can be highly trained in the use of guns. That teacher can still suffer from emotional distress (divorce) and act out due to emotions not training. This point isn't valid concerning emotional behavior.
2. Friendly fire is a real thing. I was in the 1991 Gulf war. The military is highly trained, more so than a teacher would be. Friendly fire kills many soliders. My own battalion commander killed 7 America soliders due to friendly fire. In chaotic situations, school shooter, training doesn't mean no friendly fire.
Your argument rests on the assumption that only one situation is going to occur.
1. The teacher will defend the classroom safely.
There are other possible events that can occur, we must consider then when considering your position.
2. Student gets the gun, harms others
3. Teacher has bad day, harms students
4. Some accidental shooting of teachers gun, harms others
5. Shooter enters school, teacher trys to defend, accientally harms other students
6. Shooter enters shcool, several teachers try to defend, confusion of who is correct shooter, friendly fire, others are harmed.
You have presented one option. But there are other optional events. They must be considered. Lets say for the sake of simplicity all events share an equal degree of probability. Each event hold a 17% chance of occuring if one of those events take place. Option 2-6 are negative events. That would mean, a negative event is 83% more likely than the one positive event you wish to guard against. This means the risk outweighs the reward. We will let the data dict policy. The data says the answer to teachers carring guns in school should be no.
If a teacher was to respond to a shooter, and that teacher accidentally harms another student, the school district would be liable for that injury. If the teacher simply has a gun at school, and a student is harmed by it, for any reason, the school district would be liable for that harm. This opens the school district for a large lawsuit and could bankrupt the district.
1. Teachers are human and prone to human behavior issues.
2. Training teachers doesn't remove mental health issues.
3. Liability for the school district if a teacher does harm a student with a gun is incedibly large.
4. More weapons increases the probability that someone who should have one does have one. This adds more weapons and more probablity of harm.
5. Oversteps parental consent. I don't want my child in the room of an armed person when I cannot gage their mental health condition.
I think the case has been made. There is to much possible down side, to what is an alreadly unlikely event, to take the added risk that Pro wishes to take. Pro recognizes a problem, however Pro's solution actually adds to the problem and generates greater risk. There are to many school shootings, agreed. However, this isn't the solution.
Thanks for the quick debate Pro. Good Luck
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||2||3|