The Instigator
LeviStevenson4048
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
kclark101
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Should teachers be allowed to carry weapons to prevent school shootings?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
kclark101
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/28/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,055 times Debate No: 64101
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

LeviStevenson4048

Con

: Child Psychologist, Ken Corbett, states that children get their hands on everything which I think is true. I mean think about it, if teachers had guns in a holster or in a desk or something a child would try and touch it and grab it. The second thing he states is that Pediatrics in 2001, Geoffrey Jackman and a group of his associates asked twenty-nine groups of two to three boys, most of whom were around ten-years-old to go in a room with two water pistols and a real handgun. The real pistol was set up so that when the trigger was pulled it would have the same recoil and sound of a fired bullet. Forty-eight out the sixty-four boys found the handgun and thirty picked it up and handled it. Sixteen boys out of those thirty pulled the trigger. About half the boys that found the gun thought it was a toy which I cannot see happening because of the weight of the gun. 90% of the boys who handled the gun had previous gun training. Kids know how to use guns but not how to properly use them. The FBI has homicide records that say 1,448 children have died of guns in 2010. 165 of those deaths were from another child. And what makes you think if a kid got their hands on a gun that they would not purposely or accidentally shoot it, threaten other students, or point it at other students. What makes you think that that child would not go on a rampage and the teacher cannot shoot the child?
kclark101

Pro

I feel that teachers should have guns because of the number of preventable school shootings in America.
After the sandy hook shooting, many schools boards have urged some teachers to participate a training for using guns, an example is that in the Missouri school districts, ten of them had have taken the training so far and three more have signed contracts.
Anyone with a license can carry a gun in the US, so why shouldn't teacher, especially when this is concerning the lives of many, the lives of children. Teachers should definitely be allowed to carry weapons just for the sake of the children. A study had been taken about whether or not parents would send their kids to a school with teachers train with guns or without training. The results were 70% to 30% in favor of sending their kids to a school with trained teachers. A similar study with the parents of the students of the sandy hook shooting and basically all of them felt the need for teachers armed with guns.
On the whole, teachers should be able to carry weapons to prevent school shootings without a doubt.
Debate Round No. 1
LeviStevenson4048

Con

According to a 2008 RAND Corporation study evaluating the New York Police Department"s firearm training, between 1998 and 2006, the average hit rate during gunfights was just 18 percent. When suspects did not return fire, police officers hit their targets 30 percent of the time. So just think about a teacher that is trained barely when a police officer only has this much training. I understand that the children need protection but what happens if the teacher accidentally shoots your child if you have one. On Saturday night in New York City"s Times Square, police opened fire on a man who was walking erratically into oncoming traffic and, when approached by law enforcement, reached into his pocket as if he were grabbing a weapon. The officers fired three shots. One hit a 54-year-old woman in the knee and another grazed a 35-year-old woman"s buttocks. None hit the suspect, whom police subsequently subdued with a taser.
kclark101

Pro

The results of teachers armed with guns can already be felt. On a week before Friday"s school shooting in Marysville, Washington, a mentally ill Marine Corps veteran armed with a hatchet walked in to a Virginia high school not long before students arrived. Fortunately, a cafeteria worker spotted him and called the police. But unfortunately the responding officers came just a bit too late. Why this individual had a hatchet remains a mystery, but he killed and wounded many defenseless teenagers. If the cafeteria worker was trained with using a gun, the kids who were injured wouldn't have been injured and the life of one wouldn't have been lost.
Debate Round No. 2
LeviStevenson4048

Con

Teachers touch and abuse and threaten to shoot kids. Do you think that if the teachers had a gun in their room and were thinking about shooting the student under all that stress. What makes you think though that a teacher is any different from the crazy dude. If that teacher wanted to they could go on a rampage and if they are trained real good and knew the layout and other teachers who had guns they could take over the place if they really wanted. It also takes about 90 seconds to @ minutes for a school shooting to occur so by the time the cops responded they would be to late like you said.
kclark101

Pro

It is true that with guns, teachers may abuse and threaten kids, but without guns, teachers will still threaten them, and the number of teachers abuses should stay the same. As a teacher, a career who teaches other how to behave, it would be quite ironic if he/she used something against the students when it should have been to protect them. I believe that the teachers trained with guns should have the responsibility to protect the kids, and not hurt them with it. Another big thing is that none of this has happened yet. Out of all the schools that have trained teachers with guns, there were no teacher who abused the students with it, therefore you are drawing a conclusion with no evidence to back it up and is totally irrelevant.
Debate Round No. 3
LeviStevenson4048

Con

But would you want an old lady with a gun with shaky hands shooting stuff. Plus, 3/4 of teachers wouldn't even want a gun says a survey. And there might be more than one shooter that has smoke bombs and explosives.
kclark101

Pro

First of all, there is a age limit on the gun training, you wouldn't want a old lady to shoot the gun. A process specially selects the few teachers who gets to go to the gun training and they just wouldn't not chose anyone who is a senior. Out of all the news about teacher trained with guns, all of them are fairly young and in their 20's or 30's. Another thing you said was the fact that there may be more than one shooter. That's very true, but the fact remains that there are more than one trained teachers in the school, you also said in a earlier round that the average hit rate during gunfights was just 18 percent. If you do the math, you would find that if two people with shooting the gunman (0.18+0.18x0.82), the chance has risen 14.76% and is 32.76%, if that number is increased to three, it would be around 45%. That's if all three armed teachers shoot once, if they shot more than once, that number would increase and the possibility of even one shot landing on target would be really high.

Sources:
http://america.aljazeera.com...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
http://gunwars.news21.com...
Debate Round No. 4
LeviStevenson4048

Con

But if there were three teachers getting shot and a student is across from them or the shooter has taken them hostage the teachers bullets are already fired and can not be taken back and if they hit the student they would be in trouble. If it was a code red there are always students going around the school and one of my teachers has been to a school where it takes about seven minutes for a code red to complete but like I stated earlier it takes around 90 seconds to 2 minutes for a school shooting to occur.
kclark101

Pro

You are basing all of your assumptions on a very improbably situation with is very unlikely going to ever happen. I have seen you use the word "if" a lot and in language arts, we call this type of logical fallacy the slippery slope and it basically mean that you are asserting that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact/event that should not happen, thus the first step should not happen [1]. Also, in school shootings, the gunman tends to rapid fire and to take people hostage. Another thing, since I'm still in school, it the code red (we call it lockdown) is completed very fast, less than 30 second for sure. If you're in the room, 10 seconds is all you need and if you're outside the room, 30 seconds in more than enough. Therefore, it could be easily concluded without a doubt that teachers carrying guns to prevent school shooting should definitely be allowed.

[1] : http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
I do not know of any teachers being so stressed that they kill kids. And that has to be a minor miracle in itself with the monsters our liberal parents are turning out.So, why not let them carry. Not all will. And how much training do you need to point and shoot.That is all most of those who were confronted with a bad guy with a gun needed to do. Instead the law disarmed them and all they could do is attack with maybe a pencil.The police are very seldom first responders, the victims are.Even in Newtown, all the police did was clean up the mess that a gun free zone made.

Lets face it, most people do not carry guns.But just the fact they might will stop a lot of bad guys. But you set up gun free zones and that is a red flag to a bull. Just an invitation for a deranged bad guy to kill as many as he can till the police arrive. All most all of them kill themselves when they have a gun pointed at them.The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jzyehoshua 2 years ago
Jzyehoshua
LeviStevenson4048kclark101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I wasn't sure who to vote for until the last 2 rounds, Pro made better arguments and started using sources in the final rounds.