http://www.chattanoogan.com/2013/1/5/241601/Rep.-Eric-Watson-Files-Bill-To-Allow.aspx

Rep. Eric Watson Files Bill To Allow "Highly Trained" Faculty And Staff To Carry Weapons At Schools

Saturday, January 05, 2013

State Rep. Eric Watson filed legislation on Friday "to allow certain school personnel to undergo specific training to be prepared in case events occur that threaten the safety and lives of children."

He said, “Today, as a state, as a nation, we grieve for the lost of innocence from the events that occurred in a violent outburst on Friday, Dec. 14, 2012. The event was so horrific no words have been invented to satisfactorily describe the horror experienced by the precious elementary students, their principals, their teachers, their parents or the small New England community that will never be the same.

There is nothing any of us can do, to ease their pain, or to cause these little children to come back to their family this Christmas.

”Reaction to the tragedy in Sandy Hook, Conn., has increased the debate about how best to protect against school place violence. Watson has begun laying out the frame work for a law that would give local schools an option to allow members of the facility and staff to serve as an added measure to combat an active shooter in their school building. The violence we see spreading from shopping malls in Oregon, to movie theaters in Colorado, to college campuses in Virginia, to elementary schools in Connecticut, is being spawned by the society in which we live. Politicians can no longer be allowed to defend their personal ideological reasoning instead we must protect our children. Parents will no longer tolerate inaction from politicians.

“Our government does all it can to promote business, lower taxes, etc… but now is the time to begin doing all we can to stop the next attack on a movie theater, a shopping mall, a college campus or a elementary class. We must now focus on enforcing our current laws and expanding the use of resources to an unprotected class. The people must know that we will do all we can in Tennessee to protect our children.

"Principals and school leaders in my district have asked me to present legislation that will, under specific guidelines, allow highly trained faculty and staff to carry a weapon in their school. The individuals that choose to do so will have to be a handgun carry permit holder. They will have to get permission from the local LEA and take further training in crisis management and hostile situations. In addition the ammunition in the weapon will have to minimize the risk of ricochet. This legislation will let the individuals who commit these crimes know that in Tennessee, we will protect our children. We must now use every action to solve, prevent, and stop these events from occurring.”

Rep. Watson is chairman of the Judiciary Committee, graduate of the Tennessee Bureau Investigation State Academy- Class President, graduate of the Tennessee Sheriffs School, Graduate of the Tennessee Law Enforcement Academy, graduate of the Tennessee Public School System, Co-Chair of NCSL Law and Criminal Justice Committee, appointed member of the Tennessee Criminal Justice Coordinating Council and as well a detective for the Benton Police Department.

A press conference will be held 2 p.m. on Monday at the Bradley Central High School in Cleveland. Director of Schools, principals and teachers will be present to speak about this bill as well, it was stated.

@westside-steve said:

Actually we aren't talking about reducing gun violence.

This entire debate is about a fraction of 1 percent including crazy people with assault weapons in schools.

The vast majority of gun violence is good old garden variety thugs in the streets.

And to make a note of this: what interest group that supports the president profits from allowing convicted gun criminals to get back on the street?

WSS

how about the gun control freaks themselves? the ones most interested in getting guns OFF the streets are the sick minded leftists that want the gun play

to make their sick minded arguements on the evils of guns!

again a deterioration of personal liberties for the many by the decisions of the few....

@vaportrail said:

I think that the marshall option is not really a realistic choice. I mean, everyone's fired up about gun violence now, but what about 2 years from now? there's not going to be any gun violence in 99.999% of schools that passed levies to do this, and people are going to be wondering why we're letting a shooting that happened a long time ago, far away dictate how we spend our money.

I believe you are right about what plays out 2 years or so....

but like all the other private liberties we are losing, this being one more..

we will be forced as a community to maintain such protective measures, whatever the costs? I dont know...

to believe gun violence will go away is not realistic though,

But the benefit of showing a protective presence will create more reluctance of a violent gun crime.

@vaportrail said:

I think that the marshall option is not really a realistic choice. I mean, everyone's fired up about gun violence now, but what about 2 years from now? there's not going to be any gun violence in 99.999% of schools that passed levies to do this, and people are going to be wondering why we're letting a shooting that happened a long time ago, far away dictate how we spend our money.

Actually we aren't talking about reducing gun violence.

This entire debate is about a fraction of 1 percent including crazy people with assault weapons in schools.

The vast majority of gun violence is good old garden variety thugs in the streets.

And to make a note of this: what interest group that supports the president profits from allowing convicted gun criminals to get back on the street?

WSS

@fairhooker11 said:

that has to be the truest conservative statement of the year, you could plug in just about any govt spending program (federal or local) and ask, WHY do they need more $$ when they cant even

account for the (mis)management of the original tax revenues to the program ? !

But getting to a solution to keeping our kids and teachers safe by hiring "Marshall's" seems to be sensible to me, but the cost burden to the community by local referendums.

I think that the marshall option is not really a realistic choice. I mean, everyone's fired up about gun violence now, but what about 2 years from now? there's not going to be any gun violence in 99.999% of schools that passed levies to do this, and people are going to be wondering why we're letting a shooting that happened a long time ago, far away dictate how we spend our money.

So if you are man enough you can join the good fight and protect our rights or if you are just another yellow belly coward then turn and run because we have you in our sights.

@vaportrail said:

I don't agree that giving teachers guns is the answer. Let's not forget that these teachers that you want to give guns are the same teachers you complained made too much money for doing nothing and being protected by their union. Teachers have enough responsibilities already, and the majority of them are underpaid and overworked. If you're going to add more guns to a school, then just give them to designated security guards whose only responsibility is student safety.

Ok....I am good with that, though I don't recall the union angle.

As I outlined in another post on this thread, we could hire a cop or two a school.

@westside-steve said:

Oh, sorry. Didn't realize we couldn't afford it.

Also we can't afford to enforce the gun laws we have now so how the hell are we going to find money for enough officers to confiscate these weapons?

WSS

that has to be the truest conservative statement of the year, you could plug in just about any govt spending program (federal or local) and ask, WHY do they need more $$ when they cant even

account for the (mis)management of the original tax revenues to the program ? !

But getting to a solution to keeping our kids and teachers safe by hiring "Marshall's" seems to be sensible to me, but the cost burden to the community by local referendums.

@ballpeen said:

Sounds like you are wanting to disagree on principal and can't argue my point other than a bunch of what if's.

As I said, the teacher would be the one to decide if they were comfortable or not. maybe they don't keep them on them but locked in their desk. There are ways to keep some pimple faced, pencil necked kid from getting the gun.

Where things of value are kept it isn't uncommon to have armed security. Maybe you disagree, but from my chair there is nothing more valuable than our kids.

Are our kids worth protecting. Yes or no is all the reply necessary.

Ok....of course they are. We just disagree on how best to do that. I want to have some security at the schools and you want to wave a magic wand and make the guns and bad guys disappear.

I don't agree that giving teachers guns is the answer. Let's not forget that these teachers that you want to give guns are the same teachers you complained made too much money for doing nothing and being protected by their union. Teachers have enough responsibilities already, and the majority of them are underpaid and overworked. If you're going to add more guns to a school, then just give them to designated security guards whose only responsibility is student safety.

@vaportrail said:

Even if they don't know specifically which teacher it is, the kids will know that there are 5 guns in the school. Do they carry them on their person? If so, they can be seen if a teacher bends over the wrong way. I'm a teacher, and a significant amount of time, my back is turned to my class while I'm writing on the board. If I have one of these guns, my job becomes much more stressful because I don't know how my students will react if they realize I'm carrying. Weapons within reach of a bunch of immature teens is not a good idea.

Sounds like you are wanting to disagree on principal and can't argue my point other than a bunch of what if's.

As I said, the teacher would be the one to decide if they were comfortable or not. maybe they don't keep them on them but locked in their desk. There are ways to keep some pimple faced, pencil necked kid from getting the gun.

Where things of value are kept it isn't uncommon to have armed security. Maybe you disagree, but from my chair there is nothing more valuable than our kids.

Are our kids worth protecting. Yes or no is all the reply necessary.

Ok....of course they are. We just disagree on how best to do that. I want to have some security at the schools and you want to wave a magic wand and make the guns and bad guys disappear.

@mld-woody said:

You are assuming everyone would break the speed limit? If anything it would hinder the economy and society. A longer time in the car is less time buying things in a store.

Its a cost benefit thing...

Oh, sorry. Didn't realize we couldn't afford it.

Also we can't afford to enforce the gun laws we have now so how the hell are we going to find money for enough officers to confiscate these weapons?

WSS

@westside-steve said:

Simply talking about saving innocent lives.

A 35 mile per hour speed limit would save thousands.

And instead of costing tax money it would be a financial cash cow!

How many people are killed with hand guns every year?

Since no 1 really needs 1 to hunt why not ban them all together?

Why be so selective with your altruism?

Wss

You are assuming everyone would break the speed limit? If anything it would hinder the economy and society. A longer time in the car is less time buying things in a store.

Its a cost benefit thing...

Scrambled words woodpecker

@westside-steve said:

Simply talking about saving innocent lives.

A 35 mile per hour speed limit would save thousands.

And instead of costing tax money it would be a financial cash cow!

How many people are killed with hand guns every year?

Since no 1 really needs 1 to hunt why not ban them all together?

Why be so selective with your altruism?

Wss

Hey I'd agree to that, no problem. The problem with that lies with guys like diehard who aren't insane and get something out of shooting. I get it, really I do. I don't hate target shooting, its fun. I like history's top shot. It's hard to tell someone who enjoys that that they'd have to live without it, but like I said, plenty of people enjoy/enjoyed smoking but it didn't stop everyone else who hated it from fucking the mighty tobacco industry in their collective ass. The NRA better start lubing up early because I think they'll be in the same boat as big tobacco soon.

@mld-woody said:

But you at comparing apples and oranges.

Simply talking about saving innocent lives.

A 35 mile per hour speed limit would save thousands.

And instead of costing tax money it would be a financial cash cow!

How many people are killed with hand guns every year?

Since no 1 really needs 1 to hunt why not ban them all together?

Why be so selective with your altruism?

Wss

@westside-steve said:

Just pointing out that nobody really gives a rat's ass about human life.

So I will assume all the whining is merely to score political points.

WSS

But you at comparing apples and oranges.

@mld-woody said:

That didn't make sense in the last thread. No one uses the speed limit to kill people. Hell, the speed limit isn't really even what kills people. Really if you guys want to get you pro gun point across it would probably help to NOT bring up these dumb comparisons.

Just pointing out that nobody really gives a rat's ass about human life.

So I will assume all the whining is merely to score political points.

WSS

@diehardbrownsfan said:

Are you filling the heads of these poor immature teens with your liberal ideology?

If that's what Fox is calling science these days, then yes.

@vaportrail said:

Even if they don't know specifically which teacher it is, the kids will know that there are 5 guns in the school. Do they carry them on their person? If so, they can be seen if a teacher bends over the wrong way. I'm a teacher, and a significant amount of time, my back is turned to my class while I'm writing on the board. If I have one of these guns, my job becomes much more stressful because I don't know how my students will react if they realize I'm carrying. Weapons within reach of a bunch of immature teens is not a good idea.

Are you filling the heads of these poor immature teens with your liberal ideology?

@ballpeen said:

Thats a problem leaving school funding to a levy system. At some point elected officials need to make hard decisions, even if unpopular with the voters.

Take Strongsville...I don't know anything about it other than where it is and I like to eat at Don's Pomeroy house.

I would imagine it has 1 HS, 1-2 Middleschools and 3-4 elementary schools. I don't count private schools, they do their own thing. So we are talking 7 schools, which would mean 7-8 positions to fill. I don't see that as a big problem...you are talking 50 or so thousand per school and another one time 15K expense to install 7-8 security cameras at various locations that would be monitored.

I like the idea of armed teachers. It wouldn't have to be all of them....maybe 4-5 per school....the ones that want to take on the responsibility. Give them a little more pay just like a coach gets a little more pay. Don't even let students know who carries and who doesn't. Get them trained and let them carry. That might give these punks some cause for pause knowing it isn't just a bunch of people who might throw a book at them but possibly 5-6 teachers who might start shooting at them.

Oh my god I live there! Yeah the Pomeroy house is great.

Anyway we have 1 high school and 2 middle schools which they are both gonna tear down to make one giant school. They've also been removing some elementary schools lately.

We only were able to pass the levy once by removing buses and making all the parents drive their kids in...

We already have a cop in the school, no idea what he does though .

@vaportrail said:

Even if they don't know specifically which teacher it is, the kids will know that there are 5 guns in the school. Do they carry them on their person? If so, they can be seen if a teacher bends over the wrong way. I'm a teacher, and a significant amount of time, my back is turned to my class while I'm writing on the board. If I have one of these guns, my job becomes much more stressful because I don't know how my students will react if they realize I'm carrying. Weapons within reach of a bunch of immature teens is not a good idea.

Yeah I agree. Secretly arming teachers in the school is a bad idea. Students will easily find out. Hell, we knew which teachers were gonna get laid off if the levy failed again

@westside-steve said:

Guns are also used by city state and federal police, the FBI and all branches of the armed forces.

The comparison between guns cars is only valid in this regard:

Human life is not really a priority.

Of the thousands upon thousands of auto accident deaths in the United States each and every year how many would be prevented with a nation wide 35 mile per hour speed limit?

But it would be inconvenient.

WSS

That didn't make sense in the last thread. No one uses the speed limit to kill people. Hell, the speed limit isn't really even what kills people. Really if you guys want to get you pro gun point across it would probably help to NOT bring up these dumb comparisons.

@ballpeen said:

I like the idea of armed teachers. It wouldn't have to be all of them....maybe 4-5 per school....the ones that want to take on the responsibility. Give them a little more pay just like a coach gets a little more pay. Don't even let students know who carries and who doesn't. Get them trained and let them carry. That might give these punks some cause for pause knowing it isn't just a bunch of people who might throw a book at them but possibly 5-6 teachers who might start shooting at them.

Even if they don't know specifically which teacher it is, the kids will know that there are 5 guns in the school. Do they carry them on their person? If so, they can be seen if a teacher bends over the wrong way. I'm a teacher, and a significant amount of time, my back is turned to my class while I'm writing on the board. If I have one of these guns, my job becomes much more stressful because I don't know how my students will react if they realize I'm carrying. Weapons within reach of a bunch of immature teens is not a good idea.

The comparison between guns cars is only valid in this regard:

Human life is not really a priority.

Of the thousands upon thousands of auto accident deaths in the United States each and every year how many would be prevented with a nation wide 35 mile per hour speed limit?

But it would be inconvenient.

WSS